Effects of supplemental protein and energy and feeding frequency on the performance of lactating dairy cows fed a protein deficient diet
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this experiment was to study the interaction between feeding frequency and supplementation of a protein-deficient diet with an undegradable protein and energy source on milk production and composition. Eight Holstein cows were used in a 2 × 2 factorial arrangement, using a replicated 4 × 4 Latin square design with 14-d experimental periods. The main factors were feeding frequency of the basal diet (two vs. seven times daily) and the addition of a protein-energy supplement fed in seven meals daily. Intake of the basal diet was individually restricted to 95% of previous ad libitum intake. The supplement consisted of 1.71 kg of Pro-Lak® (70% rumen-undegradable protein) and 0.94 kg of dried molasses. The basal diet provided 69, 89, 54, and 95% of the daily requirements of crude protein, rumen-degradable and rumen-undegradable proteins and NEL, respectively. Milk protein yield increased (P = 0.06) by 4% with increased feeding frequency. Milk and milk protein yield both increased (P < 0.01) by 12% with the supplement, but no interaction between feeding frequency and the supplement was observed. Urinary excretion of purine derivatives, an index of rumen microbial protein synthesis, was not affected by treatments. Thus, the results indicate that microbial growth was not affected by meal frequency or the protein-energy supplement, maybe due to the high supply of rumen-degradable protein from the basal diet. The effect of increasing meal frequency on milk protein yield might be related to an increased post-ruminal digestibility of organic matter. Key words: Dairy cows, feeding frequency, milk production, protein, purines
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) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 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".