MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1995967966 · doi:10.4141/a01-017

Methane production from dairy and beef heifers fed forages differing in nutrient density using the sulphur hexafluoride (SF<sub>6</sub>) tracer gas technique

2002· article· en· W1995967966 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Animal Science · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
KeywordsForageDry matterAnimal scienceHayBreedBeef cattleLatin squareBiologyNutrientDairy cattleChemistryRumenFood scienceAgronomyFermentationEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The effects of cattle breed type [dairy (Holstein) versus beef (Charolais × Simmental)] and forage quality (high, medium and low) on methane production were measured under ad-libitum and restricted feeding conditions. The in vitro organic matter digestibility (IVOMD) of the forage diets was high = 61.5%, medium = 50.7% and low = 38.5%. Each hay diet was fed to four animals (two dairy and two beef heifers) in three periods of four 3 × 3 Latin squares. Each period consisted of 23 d during which heifers were individually fed their assigned forage for 14 d on ad-ibitum feeding. Following this, intake was restricted to 2% of body weight (BW) for 9 d. Methane production was measured for five 24-h intervals in each period at both levels of intake using the SF 6 gas technique. Methane production was not different (P &gt; 0.05) between dairy (238.0 ± 6.9 L d -1 ) and beef cattle (228.6 ± 7.8 L d -1 ) under either level of feeding. Forage quality affected CH 4 (L d -1 ) output, with high = medium &gt; low during ad-libitum feeding. This effect of forage quality on CH 4 production was absent during restricted feeding (P &gt; 0.05). Day-to-day variation in CH 4 production was 26.9 and 27.1% on ad-libitum and restricted feeding respectively (P &lt; 0.05), whereas animal-to-animal variation (P &lt; 0.05) was 26.6% (ad libitum) and 25.3% (restricted). On ad-libitum feeding, dry matter intake (DMI) was strongly correlated (P = 0.0001; r = 0.8) with CH 4 production (L d -1 ), and accounted for 64% of daily variation in CH 4 production. Methane [L kg -1 digestible organic matter intake (DOMI)] was highest (P &lt; 0.05) on low-quality diets under both feeding regimes, and was not influenced (P &gt; 0.05) by cattle type. Methane production as a percent of gross energy intake (GEI) was not influenced by diet. It can be concluded that the SF 6 tracer technique provides a measure of enteric CH 4 production directly from animals under production conditions. There were no differences in CH 4 production between dairy and beef breeds, but the quality of forages affected CH 4 production under both ad-libitum and restricted feeding. Key words: Methane, SF 6 tracer technique, cattle breed type, forage quality, level of intake

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.

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)0.000
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 score0.515
Threshold uncertainty score0.840

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.191 · 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