Digestion, Ruminal Fermentation, Ciliate Protozoal Populations, and Milk Production from Dairy Cows Fed Cinnamaldehyde, Quebracho Condensed Tannin, or Yucca schidigera Saponin Extracts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Four ruminally cannulated lactating cows were used in a 4 x 4 Latin square design (28-d periods) to determine the effects of cinnamaldehyde (CIN; 1 g/cow per day), condensed tannins from quebracho trees (QCT, containing 70% tannins, 150 g/cow per day), and saponins from Yucca schidigera extract (YSE, containing 10% saponins; 60 g/cow per day) on digestion, ruminal fermentation characteristics, protozoal populations, and milk production. Intake of dry matter was not affected by the addition of CIN or QCT, but cows fed YSE had lesser intake than cows fed the control diet (21.8 vs. 23.2 kg/d). Apparent total-tract digestibilities of dry matter, organic matter, crude protein, neutral detergent fiber, and acid detergent fiber were unaffected by dietary treatments. Supplementation with CIN, QTE, or YSE did not affect in situ ruminal degradation of soybean meal, grass silage, or corn grain. Ruminal pH (6.67), total volatile fatty acid concentration (135 mM), and molar proportions (mol/100 mol of total volatile fatty acid) of acetate (65.0), propionate (19.6), and butyrate (11.2) were similar among treatments. Ruminal NH(3)-N concentration was not changed by the addition of CIN and YSE, but tended to decrease in cows fed QCT compared with cows fed the control diet (132 vs. 160 mg/L). Total numbers of ruminal protozoa were not changed by adding CIN, QCT, or YSE in the diet (5.85 log(10)/mL). However, the number of Isotricha was greater in ruminal fluid of cows fed CIN than in ruminal fluid of cows fed the control diet (4.46 vs. 4.23 log(10)/mL). Milk production (33.1 kg/d), milk fat (4.3%), and milk protein (3.5%) remained unchanged between dietary treatments. Results of this study show that under our experimental conditions, supplementing dairy cow diets with CIN, QCT, or YSE had limited effects on digestion, ruminal fermentation characteristics, and protozoal populations. The lack of effects observed in this study suggests that these antimicrobials require administration at greater doses to favorably alter rumen microbial fermentation.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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".