Association between a pyroelectric infrared sensor monitoring system and a 3-dimensional accelerometer to assess movement in preweaning dairy calves

The objective of this study was to correlate movement assessed by a pyroelectric infrared sensor system in preweaning dairy calves with lying and standing time assessed by a 3D accelerometer considering the temperature-humidity index (THI). A total of 35 dairy calves (1-7 d of age) were enrolled in the study and 20 calves were included in the final analyses. The lying and standing time of the calves was monitored with a 3D accelerometer (Hobo Pendant G Data Logger, Onset Computer Corporation, USA), which was used as the gold standard reference. The infrared sensor monitoring system (IMS; Calf Monitoring System, Futuro Farming GmbH, Germany) was fixed to the fence of the calf hutch within the calf's reach. Temperature-humidity was monitored with 2 validated THI sensors inside and on outside of each calf hutch. Additionally, one THI sensor was located near the calf hutches. The observation period lasted 14 consecutive days. The average standing time assessed by the 3D accelerometer was 13.4 ± 12.7 (mean ± standard deviation) min/h and the average lying time was 46.6 (±12.7) min/h. The median (25th percentile; 75th percentile) number of movements measured by the IMS was 360 (60; 919) movements per hour. Number of movements per hour measured by the IMS was compared with data obtained with a validated 3D accelerometer. The Pearson correlation coefficient between both standing and lying time and the number of movements was r = 0.85 and r = -0.85, respectively. The Pearson correlation coefficients were only slightly influenced by THI (low THI [<68]: r = 0.86; medium THI [68-72]: r = 0.85; high THI [>72]: r = 0.81). Our data show that the number of movements of dairy calves measured by IMS were highly correlated with the chosen gold standard reference method. High THI slightly affects the measurement accuracy of IMS.

Evaluating different methods of serum collection to detect failed transfer of passive immunity in newborn calves via refractometry

The objective of the study was to compare 4 different methods of serum collection to assess failed transfer of passive immunity (FTPI) in dairy calves. We hypothesized that centrifuged serum, filtered serum and clotted serum at room temperature, and clotted serum at refrigerator temperature measured with Brix refractometry would highly correlate with IgG concentration assessed by radial immunodiffusion (RID; gold standard) in centrifuged serum. Blood samples were collected from 321 newborn dairy calves. In centrifuged serum (r = 0.88), serum clotted at room temperature (20.2°C ± 6.47; r = 0.86), serum clotted at refrigerator temperature (7.6°C ± 0.91; r = 0.87), and filtered serum (r = 0.70), total solids (TS) in % Brix, and IgG concentrations measured with RID were highly correlated. Regarding the refractometry results among the different serum types, the TS results of serum clotted at room temperature, clotted at refrigerator temperature, and filtered serum showed high correlation coefficients compared with the TS results of centrifuged serum (r = 0.99, r = 0.98, and r = 0.89), respectively. The test characteristics of clotted serum were as accurate as centrifuged serum and generate comparable results. Filtered serum was slightly less accurate. All serum types are valid methods to detect an FTPI in dairy calves, if the specific Brix thresholds for each serum type are considered. Nevertheless, serum clotted at refrigerator temperature should not be the preferred method to avoid the risk of hemolysis.

Observing many researchers using the same data and hypothesis reveals a hidden universe of uncertainty

This study explores how researchers' analytical choices affect the reliability of scientific findings. Most discussions of reliability problems in science focus on systematic biases. We broaden the lens to emphasize the idiosyncrasy of conscious and unconscious decisions that researchers make during data analysis. We coordinated 161 researchers in 73 research teams and observed their research decisions as they used the same data to independently test the same prominent social science hypothesis: that greater immigration reduces support for social policies among the public. In this typical case of social science research, research teams reported both widely diverging numerical findings and substantive conclusions despite identical start conditions. Researchers' expertise, prior beliefs, and expectations barely predict the wide variation in research outcomes. More than 95% of the total variance in numerical results remains unexplained even after qualitative coding of all identifiable decisions in each team's workflow. This reveals a universe of uncertainty that remains hidden when considering a single study in isolation. The idiosyncratic nature of how researchers' results and conclusions varied is a previously underappreciated explanation for why many scientific hypotheses remain contested. These results call for greater epistemic humility and clarity in reporting scientific findings.