MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1989182538 · doi:10.3168/jds.2008-1469

Alfalfa cut at sundown and harvested as baleage increases bacterial protein synthesis in late-lactation dairy cows

2009· article· en· W1989182538 on OpenAlexafffund
A.F. Brito, Gaëtan F. Tremblay, H. Lapierre, Annick Bertrand, Yves Castonguay, Gilles Bélanger, R. Michaud, C. Benchaar, D.R. Ouellet, R. Berthiaume

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Dairy Science · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
FundersAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
KeywordsDry matterAnimal scienceForageRumenNutrientLactationBiologyDigestion (alchemy)Organic matterChemistryAgronomyFood scienceFermentationEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.) cut at sundown (p.m.) has been shown to have a greater concentration of total nonstructural carbohydrates (TNC) than when cut at sunup (a.m.). Eight ruminally cannulated Holstein cows that were part of a larger lactation trial were used in a crossover design (24-d periods) to investigate the effects of alfalfa cutting time on digestibility and omasal flow of nutrients. Alfalfa was cut at sundown or sunup, field-wilted, and harvested as baleage (530 +/- 15.0 g of dry matter/kg of fresh matter). The difference in TNC concentration between p.m. and a.m. alfalfa within each pair of bales fed daily during the 10 d of data and sample collection varied from -10 to 50 g/ kg of dry matter. Each pair of bales was fed for ad libitum intake to cows once daily with no concentrate. During the 3 d of omasal sampling, intake (+0.8 kg/d) and omasal flow of organic matter (OM; +0.42 kg/d) tended to be greater when cows were fed p.m. vs. a.m. alfalfa, but no differences were found for ruminal and postruminal digestion of this nutrient. Similarly, N apparently digested ruminally and postruminally did not differ when feeding p.m. vs. a.m. alfalfa. However, N truly digested in the rumen, as a proportion of N intake, was significantly greater in cows fed p.m. (79%) vs. a.m. alfalfa (74%), thus suggesting that longer wilting time of alfalfa cut at sundown increased forage proteolysis. Supply of rumen-degradable protein did not change (2,716 g/d) when averaged across treatments, whereas omasal flow of non-NH(3) nonbacterial N was significantly decreased (-29 g/d) when feeding p.m. vs. a.m. alfalfa. Omasal flow of total bacterial non-NH(3)-N (NAN) increased (+21 g/d) significantly when cows were fed p.m. vs. a.m. alfalfa possibly because bacteria from cows fed p.m. alfalfa captured significantly more NH(3) than those from cows fed a.m. alfalfa. Therefore, greater availability of fermentable energy as TNC appears to increase the capacity of microbes to uptake NH(3)-N and convert it to microbial protein. Enhanced OM intake can also explain the observed increase in bacterial protein synthesis with p.m. alfalfa. Efficiency of bacterial protein synthesis, expressed on a fermented OM basis or as grams of bacterial NAN per gram of rumen-degradable N, did not differ between p.m. and a.m. alfalfa. Conversely, bacterial efficiency, as grams of bacterial NAN per gram of N intake, was significantly increased when cows were fed p.m. baleage. No significant difference between forage treatments was found for the omasal flow of total AA from omasal true digesta, suggesting no benefit of daytime cutting management on the passage of total AA to the lower gastrointestinal tract. Enhancing energy intake and TNC concentration of alfalfa by shifting forage cutting from sunup to sundown increased protein synthesis and NH(3) uptake by ruminal bacteria indicating an improvement in N utilization.

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)0.001
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 score0.920
Threshold uncertainty score0.190

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.223 · 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

Citations83
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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