MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Barley Processing, Forage:Concentrate, and Forage Length Effects on Chewing and Digesta Passage in Lactating Cows

2001· article· en· W1991841037 on OpenAlexaff
Weijuan Yang, K. A. Beauchemin, L.M. Rode

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Dairy Science · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsForageDry matterLatin squareAnimal scienceNeutral Detergent FiberFecesBiologyParticle sizeFodderRumenChemistryAgronomyFood scienceFermentation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dietary factors that alter fermentability, NDF content, or particle size of the diet were evaluated for their effects on chewing behavior and distribution and passage of feed particles in the digestive tract of dairy cows. A double 4 x 4 quasi-Latin square design with a 2(3) factorial arrangement of treatments was used. The dietary factors were: extent of barley grain processing, coarse (1.60 mm) or flat (1.36 mm); forage-to-concentrate ratio (F:C), low (35:65) or high (55:45) (dry matter basis); and forage particle length, long (7.59 mm) or short (6.08 mm). Eight lactating cows with ruminal and duodenal cannulas were offered ad libitum access to total mixed diets. Chewing time, expressed as minutes per day or per kilogram of dry matter or neutral detergent fiber (NDF), was increased with high F:C diets due to increased eating and ruminating times but was decreased when expressed per kilogram of NDF intake from forage. The influence of forage particle length or grain processing on chewing activity was less pronounced than F:C ratio. Chewing activity was positively correlated to proportion of long forage particles in the diet but not to particle length of the diets. Influence of feed particle size on particle size distribution in different sites of the digestive tract was minimal. Particle size distributions of duodenal digesta and feces differed; the proportion of particles retained on the 3.35- or 1.18-mm screens was higher, but proportion of particles that passed through the 1.18-mm screen was lower in duodenal digesta than in feces. Relationships between chewing activities and ruminal pH or fractional passage rate of rumen contents were not significant. These results indicate that particle size of barley-based diets was not a reliable indicator of chewing activity. Forage particle size and NDF content of the diets were more reliable indicators of chewing activity than was the NDF content of forage. Fecal particle size was not an appropriate means of estimating the size of particles exiting the reticulorumen, at least for barley-based diets. Breakdown of coarse particles was necessary, but not a rate-limiting step for particles exiting the rumen. Passage rate of the rumen contents was affected by numerous factors including chewing activity.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations62
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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