Data on Gastrointestinal and Claw Disorders as Possible Predictive Factors in Beef Cattle and Veal Calves’ Health and Welfare
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
This is an interesting data collection that aims to evaluate at the slaughterhouse the prevalence and location of hoof and gastric lesions in beef cattle. This manuscript needs some modifications/clarification before publications as follows:
ABSTRACT - You need reduce the "introduction" to 1-2 sentences and insert more details about your data.
SUMMARY - Can you make a connection betweeNnlameness and rumen effects (e.g., acidosis)?
DATA DESCRIPTION
line 63 - in Figure 1 there are 7 sheets (not 8). Include in the Figure the "legend dataset"
What is ICAR? You should explain.
line 74 - what would you like to say with "fleshness"? Conformation, fatness score? In line 111, you mentioned fatness score.
Figure 2 - I think that you can evaluate the season effect for each indicator. This could be one of the aims of this study.
line 133 - correct liner (linear)
subtitle "rumens of bulls and heifers" - How did you evaluate the redness of mucosa? And the other alterations included in the equation, how they were evaluated?
line 184 - Can you make conclusions with data from other animals?
Was the diet identical to those animals slaughtered?
Author Response
Reviewer #1
R#1. This is an interesting data collection that aims to evaluate at the slaughterhouse the prevalence and location of hoof and gastric lesions in beef cattle. This manuscript needs some modifications/clarification before publications as follows:
AU: Authors wish to thank the Reviewer for the suggestions that will certainly improve the scientific quality of the manuscript.
R#1. ABSTRACT - You need reduce the "introduction" to 1-2 sentences and insert more details about your data.
AU: The Reviewer's suggestion has been accepted, and the abstract's introduction has been shortened accordingly.
R#1. SUMMARY - Can you make a connection between lameness and rumen effects (e.g., acidosis)?
AU: As the Reviewer suggested, the Authors have added some details in Lines 41-43 about the potential association between lameness events and acidosis, which was one of the aims of the published papers from this dataset (e.g. Magrin et al. 2020, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rvsc.2020.10.022; Magrin et al. 2021, https://doi.org/10.1080/1828051X.2020.1863868). The aims of the current study have been revised accordingly (Lines 45-46).
R#1. DATA DESCRIPTION
line 63 - in Figure 1 there are 7 sheets (not 8). Include in the Figure the "legend dataset"
AU: The Reviewer is right; there was a misunderstanding. The purpose of Figure 1 was to show the connections existing among the 7 sheets where data were stored through the use of arrows, thus excluding the Legend sheet. The Authors have revised the manuscript's text in Lines 68-71, and 99.
R#1. What is ICAR? You should explain.
AU: According to the Reviewer's suggestions, a proper explanation and a specific reference have been added in Lines 86-88 concerning the ICAR claw health atlas protocol for claw disorders.
R#1. line 74 - what would you like to say with "fleshness"? Conformation, fatness score? In line 111, you mentioned fatness score.
AU: Carcass fleshness reflects carcass muscularity, and it is measured by the conformation score. However, the Authors have replaced "fleshness" with "carcass conformation" in Line 81. In Line 121, "carcass conformation" was already used, rather than "fleshness".
R#1. Figure 2 - I think that you can evaluate the season effect for each indicator. This could be one of the aims of this study.
AU: The Authors cannot satisfy the Reviewer's suggestion since: "Data is a peer-reviewed, open access journal on data in science, with the aim of enhancing data transparency and reusability. The journal publishes in two sections: a section on the collection, treatment and analysis methods of data in science; a section publishing descriptions of scientific and scholarly datasets (one dataset per paper)." The scope is to describe a scientific dataset and not process it with further analyses. Therefore, the testing of seasonal effects on each indicator in the current study would be out of the journal's scope. However, whenever possible, the Authors have evaluated the impact of the season in some previous publications (Magrin et al. 2018, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prevetmed.2018.10.018; Magrin et al. 2020, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prevetmed.2019.104864).
R#1. line 133 - correct liner (linear)
AU: Done (Line 145).
R#1. subtitle "rumens of bulls and heifers" - How did you evaluate the redness of mucosa? And the other alterations included in the equation, how they were evaluated?
AU: Descriptions and methods used to evaluate each alteration at slaughter have been reported in detail in the published paper (Magrin et al. 2021, doi: 10.3389/fvets.2020.622837) with some explicative pictures. This proper reference has been added to the manuscript in Lines 143-144. The Authors did not prefer to report each evaluation method used for each alteration since the current study aims to present a collection of a large amount of data on gastrointestinal and claw disorders of veal calves, bulls and heifers, which detailed descriptions have been already published in the cited papers.
R#1. line 184 - Can you make conclusions with data from other animals?
AU: As reported in Magrin et al. 2020 (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prevetmed.2019.104864), a single trained assessor interviewed all farmers and collected TMR and faeces samples within the given time period of each of the three assessments (on average 6.61 ± 6.2 (mean ± SD) days after the slaughter sessions). It is likely that after a few days from the slaughter session, the farmer has not yet changed the TMR used for the live animals still present on the farm of the same breed, sex and reared in similar conditions (housing, flooring, ventilation, etc.) of those inspected at the slaughterhouse. Moreover, all other information regarding the housing and management systems adopted by farmers were confirmed by a visual inspection of the farm facilities where the slaughtered animals were allotted. Some information has been added in Lines 191-192 and 199-120.
R#1. Was the diet identical to those animals slaughtered?
AU: As stated in the previous comments, it is highly likely that after a few days from a slaughter session, the farmer still adopts the same feeding, housing and management strategies as those adopted for the inspected animals at the slaughterhouse, being equal breed, gender, and finishing phase. However, the farmer was interviewed face-to-face during the farm visit, and all farm facilities were visually inspected by a trained assessor from the University.
Reviewer 2 Report
The authors have submitted a manuscript that describes data on gastrointestinal and claw disorders as possible predictive factors in beef cattle and veal calves’ health and welfare.
The data in this manuscript are original, the source is well defined and the methodologies of data collection are described with sufficient detail to allow another researcher to reproduce the results. In addition, the copyright license is well described and appropriate. The dataset is technically sound and is of appropriate quality to employ and describe control measures. The data been archived appropriately with a Digital Object Identifier (DOI) and are in a format that can be reused by others.
I do believe this work is worthy of publication in Data Journal as it stands.
Author Response
Reviewer #2
R#2. The authors have submitted a manuscript that describes data on gastrointestinal and claw disorders as possible predictive factors in beef cattle and veal calves' health and welfare.
The data in this manuscript are original, the source is well defined and the methodologies of data collection are described with sufficient detail to allow another researcher to reproduce the results. In addition, the copyright license is well described and appropriate. The dataset is technically sound and is of appropriate quality to employ and describe control measures. The data been archived appropriately with a Digital Object Identifier (DOI) and are in a format that can be reused by others.
I do believe this work is worthy of publication in Data Journal as it stands.
AU: Authors wish to thank the Reviewer for the appreciation of the work.
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
The author did all the possible corrections. Improvements on methodology section was done.
