Storage conditions of wet corn distillers' grains with solubles in combination with other feeds and understanding the effects on performance of lactating dairy cows
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ramirez-Ramirez, H. A., Geis, A. R., Heine, C. S., Clark, K. J., Gehman, A. M. and Kononoff, P. J. 2011. Storage conditions of wet corn distillers’ grains with solubles in combination with other feeds and understanding the effects on performance of lactating dairy cows. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 91: 331–339. Wet distillers’ grains are commonly stored in polyethylene silo bags until needed for feeding. The objective of the first experiment was to evaluate the nature of ensiling wet distillers’ grains with soluble (WDGS) alone or in combination with other feeds. A 3×4×3 factorial experiment was conducted in which 36 mixtures were made using three loads of distillers’ grains stored at varying levels with three feeds (corn silage, ground corn, and brome hay). In all mixtures, the addition of feeds to WDGS increased the pH of stored material. The objective of the second experiment was to evaluate the effects of feeding WDGS on milk production. Twenty Holstein cows were used in a 4×5 Youden square. Prior to initiation of the study, WDGS were stored alone (WDGS) or mixed with either 12% ground corn (DM basis) (WDGS+C), 15% brome hay (DM basis) (WDGS+H) or 15% corn silage (DM basis) (WDGS+CS) in polyethylene silo bags. Animals were assigned to one of five treatments during each 21-d period. A diet not containing WDGS was formulated (Control), along with one containing 30% WDGS (DM basis) (WDGS). Three additional diets, similar to the WDGS treatment, were formulated to include one of the three blends of WDGS with corn (WDGS+C), brome hay (WDGS+H) or corn silage (WDGS+CS). Dry matter intake (DMI) was affected by diet and, compared with Control (21.9 kg d−1±0.70 kg d−1), was greater for WDGS (23.8±0.70 kg d−1) and WDGS+C (23.7±0.70 kg d−1). Milk yield, 3.5% FCM, and fat yield were not affected by treatment. These results suggest that dairy rations can be formulated to include stored WDGS at 30% DM without negative effects on milk production and composition.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".