ArticleJournal of animal science2020
The effect of reproductive loss on the performance of a research flock.
Article in Journal of animal science, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Ewes with higher embryo survival rear lambs that grow faster.Translational animal science · 2023Article
- The role of reproductive loss on flock performance: a comparison of nine industry flocks.Translational animal science · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The reproductive performance of a sheep flock is dependent on a multitude of complex interacting factors. Achieving optimal flock performance requires knowledge of the reproductive steps and how these are linked and related to available measurements of the state and performance of the flock. The goal was to use previously collected data from a research flock that had undergone selection for fecundity (11,369 lambing records), to model the key reproductive steps affecting flock reproductive performance. The model was used to investigate how changes in liveweight, age, ovulation rate, number of fetuses at midpregnancy, number of lambs born, and birthweight affect the number of lambs weaned and the weaning weight of each lamb in this flock. The data available from the research flock were used to parameterize models of each reproductive step and assess the role of ewe age and premating liveweight on each reproductive step. These models were then linked together as a simulation tool to assess the role of different parameters on flock reproductive performance, which was defined as the total weight of lambs weaned per ewe exposed to the ram. Flock elasticities were calculated that characterize the relative importance of the effect of average premating ewe liveweight (0.81), average ovulation rate (0.33), variance in ovulation rate (-0.095), embryo survival (0.72), lamb survival (1.03), conception failure (0.35), and average ewe age (0.056) on the total kilograms of lamb liveweight at weaning per ewe exposed to the ram. The largest elasticity for lamb survival indicated that a 1% increase in lamb survival is expected to have a 1.03% increase in the total kilograms of lamb liveweight at weaning per ewe exposed to the ram in this flock. Assuming similar costs, interventions to increase lamb survival for this flock will provide the largest increase in the total kilograms of lamb liveweight at weaning per ewe exposed to the ram, which is a key metric of flock performance.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.