MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1448517089 · doi:10.1071/an15287

Supplementation with crushed rapeseed causes reduction of methane emissions from lactating dairy cows on pasture

2015· article· en· W1448517089 on OpenAlexaff
T. M. Storlien, E. Prestløkken, K. A. Beauchemin, Tim A. McAllister, A. D. Iwaasa, O. M. Harstad

Bibliographic record

VenueAnimal Production Science · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
FundersNorges Miljø- og Biovitenskapelige UniversitetNorges Forskningsråd
KeywordsDry matterAnimal sciencePastureTotal mixed rationRumenChemistryRapeseedSilageEnvironmental management systemLactationAgronomyBiologyFood scienceIrrigationIce calving

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The main objective of this study was to investigate the effect of supplementing a pasture diet with crushed rapeseed on enteric methane (CH4) emissions from lactating dairy cows. The experiment was conducted as a crossover design using eight multiparous lactating Norwegian red dairy cows [(means ± s.d.) 548 ± 52 kg bodyweight, 38 ± 14 days in milk and 35 ± 3.7 kg milk/day, at the start of the experiment] maintained in two groups and fed two diets in two periods with the second period extended (18 days) to investigate the persistence of the CH4 response. Four of the eight cows were fitted with a rumen cannula with two cannulated cows assigned to each group. Cows were maintained on pasture (24 h/day) with access to 9 kg/day of concentrate containing 10% crushed rapeseed (RSC) or a control concentrate (CC). Dietary fat content was 63 g/kg dry matter for RSC and 42 g/kg dry matter for CC. The CH4 production was measured for five consecutive days in each period using the sulfur hexafluoride tracer gas technique. Compared with CC, RSC caused a reduction in enteric CH4 emission (221 vs 251 g/day and 8.1 vs 9.0 g/kg of energy-corrected milk), and this response persisted in the extension period. Cows fed RSC had higher milk yield compared with cows fed CC (31.7 vs 29.6 kg/day). However, milk fat and protein content were lower in milk from cows fed RSC than CC. Therefore, energy-corrected milk was not affected by treatment. Feeding RSC lowered milk fat content of palmitic acid compared with CC. The study showed that adding crushed RSC to the diet can be an effective means of reducing CH4 emissions from lactating dairy cows on pasture, without negatively affecting milk production.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.250
Threshold uncertainty score0.167

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.065
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.239 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnimal Production ScienceSame topicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive PhysiologyFrench-language works237,207