Manipulation of cattle growth to target carcass quality.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Two trials were conducted to determine the effects of breed type, backgrounding program, and backfat end point (USBFEP) as determined by ultrasound on the performance and carcass characteristics of feedlot steers. Trial 1 utilized 144 large-framed Charolais- (304.6 +/- 16.3 kg) and 144 medium-framed Hereford-cross steers (294.8 +/- 20.9 kg). Trial 2 utilized 88 medium-framed Angus (289.5 +/- 15.0 kg), 88 large-framed Charolais- (299.8 +/- 17.7 kg), and 88 medium-framed Hereford-cross (291.1 +/- 20.9 kg) steers. Within breed type, short- (70 d) or long-term (126 d) backgrounding programs (Trial 1) and 6- or 12-mm USBFEP (Trials 1 and 2) were assigned. In both trials, carcass size was greater (P < 0.05) for the large-framed Charolais-cross steers, longer backgrounding, and fatter USBFEP treatments. Lean meat yield was greater (P < 0.05) for Charolais- than Hereford-cross steers (Trial 1) and for the leaner USBFEP (Trials 1 and 2). Marbling was greater (P < 0.05) for Angus- (Trial 2) and Charolais- (Trials 1 and 2) than Hereford-cross steers (Trials 1 and 2) and for the fatter end point (Trials 1 and 2). It was concluded that breed type, backgrounding program, and USBFEP were effective in altering growth and could be used to target carcass traits of interest for value-based marketing programs.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".