Effects of subacute ruminal acidosis challenges on fermentation and endotoxins in the rumen and hindgut of dairy cows
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The effects of a grain-based subacute ruminal acidosis (SARA) challenge (GBSC) and an alfalfa-pellet SARA challenge (APSC) on fermentation and endotoxins in the rumen and in the cecum, as well as on endotoxins in peripheral blood, were determined. Six nonlactating Holstein cows with cannulas in the rumen and cecum were used in the study. A 3×3 Latin square arrangement of treatments with 4-wk experimental periods was adopted. During the first 3 wk of each experimental period, all cows received a diet containing 70% forages [dry matter (DM) basis]. In wk 4 of each period, cows received 1 of the following 3 diets: the 70% forage diet fed during wk 1 to 3 (control), a diet in which 34% of the dietary DM was replaced with grain pellets made of 50% ground wheat and 50% ground barely (GBSC), or a diet in which 37% of dietary DM was replaced with pellets of ground alfalfa (APSC). Rumen pH was monitored continuously using indwelling pH probes, and rumen fluid, blood, cecal digesta, and fecal grab samples were collected immediately before feed delivery at 0900 h and at 6 h after feed delivery on d 3 and 5 of wk 4. The time for which rumen pH was below 5.6 was 56.4, 225.2, and 298.8 min/d for the control, APSC, and GBSC treatments, respectively. Compared with the control, SARA challenges resulted in similar reductions in cecal digesta pH, which were 7.07, 6.86, and 6.79 for the control, APSC, and GBSC treatments, respectively. Compared with the control, only GBSC increased starch content in cecal digesta, which averaged 2.8, 2.6, and 7.4% of DM for the control, APSC, and GBSC, respectively. Free lipopolysaccharide endotoxin (LPS) concentration in rumen fluid increased from 10,405 endotoxin units (EU)/mL in the control treatment to 30,715 and 168,391 EU/mL in APSC and GBSC, respectively. Additionally, GBSC increased the LPS concentration from 16,508 to 118,522 EU/g in wet cecal digesta, and from 12,832 to 93,154 EU/g in wet feces. The APSC treatment did not affect LPS concentrations in cecal digesta and feces. All concentrations of LPS in blood plasma were below the detection limit of >0.05 EU/mL of the technique used. Despite the absence of LPS in blood, only GBSC increased the concentration of LPS-binding protein in blood plasma, which averaged, 8.9, 9.5, and 12.1mg/L for the control, APSC, and GBSC treatments, respectively. This suggests that GBSC caused translocation of LPS from the digestive tract but that LPS was detoxified before entering the peripheral blood circulation. The higher LPS concentration in cecal digesta in the GBSC compared with the APSC suggests a higher risk of LPS translocation in the large intestine in GBSC than in APSC.
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".