1
|
MacNeil MD, Berry DP, Clark SA, Crowley JJ, Scholtz MM. Evaluation of partial body weight for predicting body weight and average daily gain in growing beef cattle. Transl Anim Sci 2021; 5:txab126. [PMID: 34430801 PMCID: PMC8379516 DOI: 10.1093/tas/txab126] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/10/2021] [Accepted: 07/20/2021] [Indexed: 11/23/2022] Open
Abstract
Information on body weight and average daily gain (ADG) of growing animals is key not only to monitoring performance, but also for use in genetic evaluations in the pursuit of achieving sustainable genetic gain. Accurate calculation of ADG, however, requires serial measures of body weight over at least 70 days. This can be resource intensive and thus alternative approaches to predicting individual animal ADG warrant investigation. One such approach is the use of continuously collected individual animal partial body weights. The objective of the present study was to determine the utility of partial body weights in predicting both body weight and ADG; a secondary objective was to deduce the appropriate length of test to determine ADG from partial body weight records. The dataset used consisted of partial body weights, predicted body weights and recorded body weights recorded for 8,972 growing cattle from a range of different breed types in 35 contemporary groups. The relationships among partial body weight, predicted body weight and recorded body weight at the beginning and end of the performance test were determined and calculated ADG per animal from each body weight measure were also compared. On average, partial body weight explained 90.7 ± 2.0% of the variation in recorded body weight at the beginning of the postweaning gain test and 87.9 ± 2.9% of the variation in recorded body weight at its end. The GrowSafe proprietary algorithm to predict body weight from the partial body weight strengthened these coefficients of determination to 95.1 ± 0.9% and 94.9 ± 0.8%, respectively. The ADG calculated from the partial body weight or from the predicted body weight were very strongly correlated (r = 0.95); correlations between these ADG values with those calculated from the recorded body weights were weaker at 0.81 and 0.78, respectively. For some applications, ADG may be measured with sufficient accuracy with a test period of 50 days using partial body weights. The intended inference space is to individual trials which have been represented in this study by contemporary groups of growing cattle from different genotypes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michael D MacNeil
- Delta G, 145 Ice Cave Rd., Miles City, MT 59301, USA.,Department of Animal, Wildlife and Grassland Sciences, University of the Free State, Bloemfontein 9300, South Africa.,Agricultural Research Council, Animal Production, Irene 0062, South Africa
| | - Donagh P Berry
- Teagasc, Animal & Grassland Research and Innovation Centre, Moorepark, Fermoy, Co. Cork, Ireland
| | - Sam A Clark
- School of Environmental and Rural Science, University of New England, Armidale, New South Wales 2351, Australia
| | - John J Crowley
- AbacusBio Ltd., 442 Moray Place, Dunedin 9016, New Zealand.,Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutritional Science, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada
| | - Michiel M Scholtz
- Department of Animal, Wildlife and Grassland Sciences, University of the Free State, Bloemfontein 9300, South Africa.,Agricultural Research Council, Animal Production, Irene 0062, South Africa
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Ellis JL. A Simple Model to Determine the Efficient Duration of Exams. Educ Psychol Meas 2021; 81:549-568. [PMID: 33994563 PMCID: PMC8072954 DOI: 10.1177/0013164420963163] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/12/2023]
Abstract
This study develops a theoretical model for the costs of an exam as a function of its duration. Two kind of costs are distinguished: (1) the costs of measurement errors and (2) the costs of the measurement. Both costs are expressed in time of the student. Based on a classical test theory model, enriched with assumptions on the context, the costs of the exam can be expressed as a function of various parameters, including the duration of the exam. It is shown that these costs can be minimized in time. Applied in a real example with reliability .80, the outcome is that the optimal exam time would be much shorter and would have reliability .675. The consequences of the model are investigated and discussed. One of the consequences is that optimal exam duration depends on the study load of the course, all other things being equal. It is argued that it is worthwhile to investigate empirically how much time students spend on preparing for resits. Six variants of the model are distinguished, which differ in their weights of the errors and in the way grades affect how much time students study for the resit.
Collapse
|