Effect of abomasal or ruminal administration of citrus pulp and soybean oil on milk fatty acid profile and antioxidant properties
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Soybean oil (SBO) is rich in polyunsaturated fatty acids (FA) and rumen bypass of SBO can contribute to increase the polyunsaturated FA proportion in milk fat. Citrus pulp (CPP) is a source of antioxidants but there is little information on the effects of CP administration on milk properties. This study was performed to determine the role of rumen microorganisms in the transfer of antioxidants from CPP into milk when cows receive SBO as a source of polyunsaturated FA. Four ruminally fistulated lactating Holstein cows were assigned to a 4 × 4 Latin square design with a 2 × 2 factorial arrangement of treatments: (1) SBO administered in the rumen; (2) SBO infused in the abomasum; (3) SBO + CPP administered in the rumen; and (4) SBO + CPP infused in the abomasum. Product and site of administration had no effect on yield of milk components. Concentrations of total polyphenols and flavonoids, reducing power and production of conjugated diene (CD) hydroperoxides in milk were not affected by products, but infusion in the abomasum compared with administration in the rumen increased production of CD. Milk fat FA profile was not affected by products. However, cows infused in the abomasum compared with those administered in the rumen showed lower proportions of short-chain and monounsaturated FA and higher proportions of polyunsaturated, omega 3 and omega 6 FA in milk fat, which resulted in enhanced health-promoting index of milk. Administration of SBO and CPP (0.2 + 1.0 kg/d) in the rumen or the abomasum resulted in similar milk antioxidant properties, thus suggesting that the rumen microbes have little involvement in the metabolism of antioxidants from CPP.
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) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".