MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7005347131

Profitability of growth-enhancing technologies in Canadian feeder cattle production

2024· dissertation· en· W7005347131 on OpenAlexaffabout

Bibliographic record

VenueMspace (University of Manitoba) · 2024
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBiological and pharmacological studies of plants
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WinnipegUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFeedlotProfitability indexProduction (economics)Profit (economics)AgricultureBeef cattleProfit marginFeeder cattle
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Canadian beef industry is experiencing heightened domestic and global demand; however, it is constantly challenged by the extremely narrow profit margins. In an effort to enhance efficiency, the cattle feeding industry has adopted the use of growth-enhancing technologies (GETs), which has resulted in cattle getting to finished weights more quickly. This study focuses on three types of technologies in the feedlot phase of the beef supply chain, including a trenbolone acetate + estradiol (TBA) implant, melengestrol acetate (MGA) feed additive and ractopamine hydrochloride (RAC) feed additive. Previous research has found positive impacts of GETs on animal performance and environmental sustainability; however, economic dimensions have not been as thoroughly explored. Accordingly, this thesis is the first attempt to use recent Canadian feedlot data to determine economic gains from GET adoption by feedlots. The objective of the research conducted for this thesis is to determine the relative profitability of cattle feeding in Canada using GET (conventional) versus non-GET (non-conventional) systems. Supporting objectives are to evaluate and compare measures of animal performance of the treatment groups; and determine the efficiency of conventional and non-conventional systems by estimating the probability distribution of risk. To achieve these objectives, data from a four-year animal trial at the Agriculture and Agri-food Lethbridge Research and Development Center are used, along with supporting price data from CanFax Research Services and Statistics Canada within an enterprise budgeting framework with accompanying risk analysis. Results from the partial enterprise budget indicate that the feeding system which employed TBA has the highest net returns for both heifers and steers; however, results from the risk analysis differ. Using stochastic dominance, feed additives were discovered to be second-degree stochastic dominant for their respective sex class. Further investigation confirms that a production system providing an RAC feed additive to steers is the least likely to generate a negative net return; and likewise for heifers receiving a TBA implant.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.747
Threshold uncertainty score0.769

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMspace (University of Manitoba)Same topicBiological and pharmacological studies of plantsFrench-language works237,207