Peripartum responses of dairy cows to prepartal feeding level and dietary fatty acid source
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This experiment was conducted to investigate the effect of feeding level and oilseed supplementation during the close-up dry period on energy balance (EB), hepatic lipidosis, metabolic status, and productivity in early lactation. Seventy-seven Holstein cows were blocked according to parity and expected calving date and then assigned randomly to 1 of 6 treatments in a 2 × 3 factorial allocation with 2 feeding levels: ad libitum (AL) or 30% feed restriction (FR), and 3 dietary fatty acid sources: canola seed, linola seed, or flaxseed at 8% of dietary dry matter (DM), to enrich the rations with oleic, linoleic, or linolenic acids, respectively during the last 4 wk of gestation. After parturition, all cows were fed a common lactation diet. Cows fed AL lost less body weight (-2.9 vs. -6.0%) and body condition score (+0.67 vs. -2.30%), and consequently were in more positive EB (+4.6 vs. -0.3 Mcal) during the prepartum period than cows subjected to FR. Postpartum, FR cows lost less body weight (-9.7 vs. -12.4%) and experienced less severe negative EB (-4.5 vs. -7.0 Mcal) than AL cows. Cows fed AL had higher plasma insulin (6.8 vs. 4.4 μIU/mL) and lower nonesterified fatty acid concentrations (436 vs. 570 mEq/mL) during the close-up period than cows subjected to FR. Cows fed AL tended to have lower liver glycogen content in early lactation than cows subjected to FR (4.4 vs. 2.9 % of DM) [corrected], but had similar triglyceride content (13.1 ± 1.2 μg/g of DM). Fatty acid source did not influence response variables. In conclusion, eliminating intake depression by FR during the close-up period had positive carryover effects on EB and metabolic status during early lactation, but feeding linoleic and linolenic acids via unprotected oilseeds only had negligible effects on peripartum responses.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".