Effects of feeding time on behaviour, thermoregulation and growth of steers in winter
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Two trials were conducted to determine whether the effects of morning (1000) vs. evening (2000) feed delivery on the frequency and duration of feedbunk visits, thermoregulatory physiology and growth performance of feedlot steers were modified by ambient winter temperatures. Night-time feeding behaviours were more pronounced for evening-fed than for morning-fed cattle during both the forage-based backgrounding and concentrate-based finishing periods. Evening feeding also led to increased core body temperatures during the coldest part of the day during the backgrounding period but had little effect during the finishing period. Although ambient temperatures were similar in both trials, evening feeding improved growth rate and efficiency during the coldest part of the backgrounding period in Trial 1 but not in Trial 2. Feeding time did not affect feedlot performance during the finishing period of either trial. Evening feeding successfully altered feeding behaviours and appeared to improve thermoregulatory status during the coldest part of the backgrounding period, but did not improve growth performance or efficiency. Key words: Beef cattle, thermoregulation, evening feeding, feeding behaviour
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".