The effects of winter feeding systems on beef cow performance, soil nutrients, crop yield and system economics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A study was conducted on an annual cropped field near Lanigan, Saskatchewan over two years (2005)(2006)(2006)(2007) to evaluate the effects of three extensive winter feeding systems (bale grazing (BG), swath grazing (SG) and straw-chaff grazing (ST-CH)) and one intensive winter feeding system (drylot (DL)) on cow performance, soil nutrients, crop yield and system cost of production.Differences in BW (P<0.05) were observed during the 2005-2006 study period with the greatest difference occurring with cows in the SG feeding system.Cows grazing swaths (SG) had a BW loss of 8.0 kg over the 78 d trial period, however these cows consumed 15% less DM and 13% less TDN than cows bale grazing, grazing crop residue or fed in drylot pens.Differences in BW change (P<0.05) were also observed during Yr 2 between the cows fed drylot and cows grazing barley straw-chaff, 32.9 and 6.5 kg, respectively.This difference in body weight change (BW∆) and lower TDN consumption may be attributed to inaccessibility of the straw-chaff feed in the field, due to inclement weather and would suggest a lengthy acclimation period for extensive field grazing systems.The effects of extensive winter feeding system on soil nutrients and soil structure were determined the following spring after winter grazing.NO 3 -N levels at the low slope position in the 0-15 cm depth were 53% higher on the BG sites than the ST-CH sites.This may be attributed to the larger concentration of feed, thus feed nutrients, in the BG feeding system.Phosphorus levels on the BG wintering sites were 34% higher than levels in the SG or ST-CH sites.Crop biomass measured on the BG sites was consistent with soil nutrients captured, resulting in a 15% increase in biomass compared to ST-CH and iii SG sites.Soil nutrient and crop biomass distribution was consistent among winter grazing sites with the ST-CH sites having the most uniform distribution of nutrients and crop biomass, and the BG sites having the least.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".