MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1985801946 · doi:10.2527/jas.2008-1652

Dose response to cinnamaldehyde supplementation in growing beef heifers: Ruminal and intestinal digestion1

2009· article· en· W1985801946 on OpenAlexaff
Wenzhu Yang, Burim N. Ametaj, C. Benchaar, K. A. Beauchemin

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Animal Science · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLatin squareRumenDigestion (alchemy)Animal scienceDry matterChemistryBeef cattleFeed additiveFermentationFood scienceBiologyBroiler

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this study was to determine if cinnamaldehyde (CIN) could be used to improve feed intake, digestion, and immune status in growing beef heifers fed high-concentrate diets. The experiment was designed as a 4 x 4 Latin square using 4 ruminally and duodenally cannulated beef heifers with 4 treatments: control (no CIN added), 400 mg/d of CIN (low), 800 mg/d of CIN (medium), and 1,600 mg/d of CIN (high), and four 21-d periods. Feed intake, rumen pH and fermentation characteristics, site and extent of digestion, microbial N synthesis, blood metabolites, and acute phase protein response were measured. The diets consisted of 15% barley silage, 80% dry-rolled barley grain, and 5% supplement (DM basis). Intakes (kg/d) of DM, OM, NDF, starch, and N were quadratically (P = 0.04) changed with increasing CIN supplementation. The amount of OM fermented in the rumen quadratically (P = 0.02) decreased with increasing CIN. Digestibilities (% of intake) of OM, NDF, and N in the rumen were not affected by supplementing with low and medium CIN, but they were reduced by 8% (P = 0.10), 31% (P = 0.05), and 17% (P = 0.05), respectively, with high CIN. Similarly, digestibilities of OM and NDF in the total tract also tended to be reduced by 7% (P = 0.10) and 20% (P = 0.10), respectively, with high CIN because supplementation of CIN had minimal effects on intestinal digestibility. Flows (g/d) of microbial N and other nutrients to the duodenum were not affected by CIN supplementation, even though the amount of ruminal fermented OM varied with level of CIN supplementation. Rumen pH, total VFA concentration, and molar proportions of individual VFA were not affected by CIN. Although concentrations of NEFA (P = 0.06) and triglyceride (P = 0.01) were quadratically changed with increasing CIN supplementation, blood concentrations of glucose and urea N, white blood cell counts, serum amyloid A, and lipopolysaccharide in plasma were not affected by CIN. Plasma haptoglobin numerically (P = 0.11) decreased with the medium dose of CIN fed compared with control. The results indicate that supplementation of a high-concentrate diet with a low dose of CIN resulted in small increases in nutrient availability in the rumen due to increased feed intake and greater ruminal digestion of OM. However, feed intake and ruminal digestion of feeds were adversely affected when a high dose of CIN was used.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.963
Threshold uncertainty score0.144

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.267 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations96
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Animal ScienceSame topicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive PhysiologyFrench-language works237,207