MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1528568355 · doi:10.2527/2004.8292679x

Value of sunflower seed in finishing diets of feedlot cattle12

2004· article· en· W1528568355 on OpenAlexaff
D. J. Gibb, F. N. Owens, P. S. Mir, Z. Mir, M. Ivan, Tim A. McAllister

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Animal Science · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSunflower and Safflower Cultivation
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFeedlotSunflowerValue (mathematics)Animal scienceSunflower seedBiologyAgronomyMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The value of sunflower seed (SS) in finishing diets was assessed in two feeding trials. In Exp. 1, 60 yearling steers (479 +/- 45 kg) were fed five diets (n = 12). A basal diet (DM basis) of 84.5% steam-rolled barley, 9% barley silage, and 6.5% supplement was fed as is (control), with all the silage replaced (DM basis) with rolled SS, or with grain:silage mix replaced with 9% whole SS, 14% whole SS, or 14% rolled SS. Liver, diaphragm, and brisket samples were obtained from each carcass. In Exp. 2, 120 yearling steers (354 +/- 25 kg) were fed corn- or barley-based diets containing no SS, high-linoleic acid SS, or high-oleic acid SS (a 2 x 3 factorial arrangement, n = 20). Whole SS was included at 10.8% in the corn-based and 14% in the barley-based diets (DM basis). In Exp. 1, feeding whole SS linearly increased DMI (P = 0.02), ADG (P = 0.01), and G:F (P = 0.01). Regression of ME against level of whole SS indicated that SS contained 4.4 to 5.9 Mcal ME/kg. Substituting whole for rolled SS did not significantly alter DMI, ADG, or G:F (8.55 vs. 8.30 kg/d; 1.36 vs. 1.31 kg; and 0.157 vs. 0.158, respectively). Replacing the silage with rolled SS had no effect on DMI (P = 0.91) but marginally enhanced ADG (P = 0.10) and improved G:F (P = 0.01). Dressing percent increased linearly (P = 0.08) with level of SS in the diet. Feeding SS decreased (P < 0.05) levels of 16:0 and 18:3 in both diaphragm and subcutaneous fats, and increased (P = 0.05) the prevalence of 18:1, 18:2, cis-9,trans-11-CLA and trans-10,cis-12-CLA in subcutaneous fat. In Exp. 2, barley diets supplemented with high-linoleic SS decreased DMI (P = 0.02) and ADG (P = 0.007) by steers throughout the trial, whereas no decrease was noted with corn (interaction P = 0.06 for DMI and P = 0.01 for ADG). With barley, high-linoleic SS decreased final live weight (554 vs. 592 kg; P = 0.01), carcass weight (329 vs. 346 kg; P = 0.06), and dressing percent (58.5 vs. 59.4%; P = 0.04). Steers fed high-linoleic SS plus barley had less (P < 0.05) backfat than those fed other SS diets. No adverse effects of SS on liver abscess incidence or meat quality were detected. Although they provide protein and fiber useful in formulating finishing diets for cattle, and did improve performance in Exp. 1, no benefit from substituting SS for grain and roughage was detected in Exp. 2. Because of unexplained inconsistencies between the two experiments, additional research is warranted to confirm the feeding value of SS in diets for feedlot cattle.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations62
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Animal ScienceSame topicSunflower and Safflower CultivationFrench-language works237,207