255 Evaluation of canola meal versus soybean meal as a protein supplement on performance and carcass characteristics of growing and finishing beef cattle
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Two trials were conducted to evaluate the performance and carcass characteristics of backgrounding and finishing cattle fed canola meal (CM) versus soybean meal (SBM) as a protein supplement with or without wheat dried distillers' grains with solubles (WDDGS). Trial 1 was a 95-d backgrounding program in which 398 steer calves (288 ± 0.27 kg; mean ± SE) were assigned to one of 12 pens and fed one of four barley silage, barley grain-based diets formulated to 13.5% CP and 1.52 and 0.92 Mcal kg-1 NEm and NEg, respectively. The dietary treatments included CM (8.7% DM), SBM (7.0% DM), CM+WDDGS (4.6 & 4.8% DM), and SBM+WDDGS, (4.2 & 4.4% DM). Trial 2 utilized 300 head (306 ± 0.94 kg) assigned to 25 pens for a 61-d backgrounding and 147-d finishing program. Backgrounding diets were identical to Trial 1 with the addition of a fifth treatment (WDDGS, 9.5% DM). The basal finishing diet was barley grain-based and formulated to 13% CP and 1.95 and 1.30 Mcal kg-1 NEm and NEg, respectively. The five dietary treatments included CM (5.7% DM), SBM (4.3% DM), CM+WDDGS (3.0% & 3.1% DM), SBM+WDDGS (2.4% & 2.6% DM), and WDDGS (6.7% DM). Performance results for each trial were analyzed as a completely randomized design using the Mixed model procedure with pen as the experimental unit. Quality and yield grades were analyzed using GLIMMIX with a binomial error structure and logit data transformation. In trial 1, there were no differences between treatments for final BW (420.7 ± 1.8 kg; P = 0.30) or gain-to-feed (G:F) (0.16 ± 0.003; P = 0.60); however, ADG was greatest (P < 0.05) for cattle fed SBM relative to cattle fed SBM+WDDGS (1.45 ± 0.04 kg vs. 1.32 ± 0.03 kg). In trial 2, no treatment differences (P > 0.22) were detected for ADG (1.65 ± 0.01 kg), DMI (9.77 ± 0.07 kg), or G:F (0.17 ± 0.001). Cattle fed SBM+WDDGS had the least subcutaneous fat depth relative to cattle fed CM+WDDGS (1.17 ± 0.06 cm vs. 1.46 ± 0.05 cm; P = 0.02) and the poorest marbling score relative to cattle fed WDDGS (398.75 ± 15.19 vs. 440.10 ± 8.20; P = 0.05). There was a tendency (P = 0.09) for greater proportion of AAA carcasses with the WDDGS treatment (66.1 ± 6.2%) while SBM+WDDGS had the least (41.4 ± 6.5%). These results indicate that CM is equal to SBM as a protein supplement for backgrounding and finishing cattle and that provision of WDDGS as a source of rumen undegradable protein did not benefit performance. The combination of SBM+WDDGS negatively influenced energy partitioning to carcass fat deposition.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle