Evaluation of milk yield and milk ability traits of Lithuanian red cows with different genotypes during lactation in organic farms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Holstein cattle have been used for many decades for the breeding of other dairy cattle in order to increase milk production. Productivity of cows differs between organic and conventional herds; therefore, the ability of cows to adapt to an organic production environment has been questioned, whether these high-cost genotypes are suitable for organic farming systems. Organic dairy farming has grown, farmers have realised that many available conventional breeds of cows are not well adapted to new situations and that more robust cows are able to function well in the organic environment. The aim of this study was to investigate the milk yield and milk ability traits during lactation of Lithuanian red cows with different genotypes. The research was carried out in an organic farm in 2020 with dairy cows (n = 248) of Lithuanian red cattle population. The milk yield (MY), milking speed (MS), highest milk flow (HMF), and milking time (MT) were evaluated. Investigated traits were measured with DE Laval electronic milk meters, “Apro Windows” software. All records were between 5 and 330 days of lactation, with average 2.26 ± 0.44 of lactation. All cows had two milk-recording events per test day (morning and evening). Lactation of cows was divided into stages: (stage 1 – <= 60; stage 2 – 61–150; stage 3 – 151–240; an stage 4 – 241–330 days of lactation). The statistical analysis of data was performed using the SPSS 25.0 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA) software. The highest number of cows was with LRxRHxRH genotype, which accounted for 37.83% (χ2 = 53.540, df = 1, P < 0.001) of all investigated cows. We observed that the highest MY and HMF in the organic farm was detected in cows with genotypes LRxAIxRH, LRxHxH and LRxRHxRH in the first and the second stages of lactation (P < 0.05). MT of LRxHxH, LRxRHxDR and LRxAIxRH genotype cows during all stages of lactation was longer, compared to cows of other genotypes (P < 0.05). We estimated that of all fixed effects the biggest influence on MS, HMF, MT (P < 0.001) and MY was by a genotype of cows (P < 0.01), while the stage of lactation showed the highest impact on MY, HMF, MT (P < 0.001) and MS (P < 0.01). Analysis of different genotypes of cows revealed that local breeds are well-adapted and more suitable for organic farming.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".