MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414831138 · doi:10.1093/jas/skaf300.545

PSXI-10 Movement patterns and water source seeking in grazing lactating first-calf beef cows with different residual feed intake.

2025· article· en· W4414831138 on OpenAlexaff
S H Ramírez, Arturo Macias Franco, Alexandra J. Harland, Edward W. Bork, Carolyn Fitzsimmons, J. A. Basarab, Graham Plastow, Francisco Novais, Gleise da Silva

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Animal Science · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicEffects of Environmental Stressors on Livestock
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGrazingPastureResidualCrossbreedWind speedBeef cattleGeolocationWind directionIndex (typography)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Feed-efficient animals positively influence both environmental and economic sustainability. Selecting cows for a lower residual feed intake (RFI) has guided feed efficiency and been thoroughly studied; however, its association with thermoregulatory behavior on grazing systems is not widely explored. This study evaluated the impact of weather conditions on the distance walked and daily water proximity of grazing first-calf beef cows with different RFI. Thirty-five crossbred heifers with 11 mo of age were classified as more efficient (LOW-RFI: n = 17, -0.8 ± 0.214 kg dry matter/d) or less efficient (HIGH-RFI: n = 18, 1.5 ± 0.220 kg dry matter/d). After calving, cows (432 ± 8.40 kg, 26 ± 1 mo) were grazed within a single pasture from June to August. Geolocation data were recorded every 7.5 min and used to compute walking distances and water proximity using Nofence© collars for 34 d. Locations were calculated with the “geosphere” Spherical Trigonometry R package v. 1.5-20 to calculate kilometers and meters walked by hour. Animal distribution was mapped in Tableau 2024.3 displaying the location relative to water sources. Environmental parameters were recorded from a meteorological station within one kilometer and included temperature, solar radiation (SR), humidity, and wind speed (WS), which were used to compute the Comprehensive Climate Index (CCI) and adjusted temperature-humidity index (THIadj). Simple linear regression models were used to assess the ability of environmental variables to predict walking distance and proximity to water sources (SAS 9.4). The daily CCI ranged from 10 to 40 (absent to extreme environmental stress; respectively) while THIadj ranged from 7 to 63 (absent stress). The LOW-RFI cows had lower walked activity at 3 AM compared with HIGH-RFI (10 vs. 14 m; P ≤ 0.005). Regardless of RFI, cows walked more when THIadj was higher (1.97 km with THIadj of 67, vs. 1.43 km with THIadj of 46; P < 0.001). Moreover, when THIadj was ≤ 63 and CCI ≤ 40 (extreme), significant correlations with water proximity were found (P = 0.0026 and P = 0.03, respectively). SR and WS were the most influential variables when modeling predictors that explained cows’ proximity to a water source, with SR increasing nearness to water source and WS reducing it (P < 0.01). However, no significant correlations were detected between RFI classification and water proximity (P > 0.085). In conclusion, these findings highlight the influence of environmental conditions on movement patterns and water-seeking behavior of grazing lactating beef cows. Solar radiation and wind speed were the strongest predictors of cow proximity to water sources. However, residual feed intake classification did not significantly impact daily water procurement but impacted walked activity at early morning.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.207 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Animal ScienceSame topicEffects of Environmental Stressors on LivestockFrench-language works237,207