Feeding concentrates based on individual cow requirements improves the yield of milk solids in dairy cows grazing restricted pasture
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A grazing experiment involving 50 lactating Holstein–Friesian dairy cows was conducted to test the hypothesis that feeding concentrates (range 3–7 kg as fed/cow.day; average 5 kg/cow.day) to grazing cows based on individual (I) cow requirements would increase milk solids yield in comparison to fixed rate (F) allocation to the whole herd (average 5 kg/cow.day for all cows). The experiment comprised two sequential periods that differed only in the way maize silage was offered to cows (either 100% on a feed pad at night or 75% on a feed pad at night, with 25% in a paddock in the morning). Intake of individual cows was estimated using the 13C and n-alkanes method. The rumen degradability of the feeds (lucerne pasture, maize silage and commercial dairy pellets) was measured in parallel, using six rumen-fistulated sheep. Compared with cows in the F group, milk yield and milk fat yield for the I cows increased (P < 0.05) by 3.0 and 11.1%, respectively. As neither milk protein content nor milk protein yield was affected (P > 0.05) by treatment, total milk solids yield (milk fat plus milk protein) was 7.0% higher (P < 0.05) for I cows than for F cows. The increase in milk fat yield was presumably associated with an improved diet nutrient balance in the I cows, as indicated by a significant correlation between fibre intake and milk fat yield for cows in the I group but not for cows in the F group. This is also supported by the results of the rumen degradability of the feeds. In this study, higher-producing cows compensated for their higher requirements by increasing intake of maize silage, rather than pasture, as the former was the less restricted feed on offer. This highlights the importance of offering at least one feed to cows in a less restricted way, in order to enable high-producing cows in the herd to compensate for their higher intake requirements. In conclusion, under the conditions of the present study, feeding concentrates to cows based on individual cow requirements increased milk solids yield at no extra cost.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".