MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1998170370 · doi:10.3168/jds.2007-0849

Prevotella bryantii 25A Used as a Probiotic in Early-Lactation Dairy Cows: Effect on Ruminal Fermentation Characteristics, Milk Production, and Milk Composition

2008· article· en· W1998170370 on OpenAlexafffund
J. Chiquette, Milton J. Allison, Mark A. Rasmussen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Dairy Science · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
FundersAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaDairy Farmers of Canada
KeywordsRumenLactationBiologySilageIce calvingAnimal scienceFood scienceComposition (language)FermentationRandomized block designAcidosisAgronomyEndocrinologyPregnancy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ingestion of high levels of rapidly fermented carbohydrates after parturition often leads to the production of excessive quantities of organic acids that may exceed the buffering capacity of the rumen and cause pH to drop. Ruminal acidosis results in animal discomfort, anorexia, depression, decreased digestibility, and decreased milk production. In the present study, we examined the effects of daily addition of cells of a newly isolated strain of Prevotella bryantii (25A) to the rumen of 12 ruminally cannulated cows in early lactation. This strain was selected based on earlier in vitro studies that indicated its ability to grow rapidly, compete for starch, and produce organic acids other than lactate. After calving, all cows received increasing amounts of an energy-dense diet containing barley grain, corn silage, and grass silage in a 40:60 forage-to-concentrate ratio. Animals were blocked according to milk production from their previous lactation. Treatments (control and P. bryantii) were distributed among cows within the same block. Cows were fed once a day. Six cows were given a daily dose of P. bryantii (2 x 10(11) cells/dose), administered directly with a syringe through the rumen cannula, from 3 wk prepartum up to 7 wk postpartum. Rumen fluid was sampled before feeding and at 2 and 3 h postfeeding on wk 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, and 7 postpartum. Feed intake and milk yield were recorded daily and milk composition was recorded 2 d/wk, up to wk 7 of lactation. Feed intake was similar between control and treated cows. Prevotella bryantii did not change milk production, but milk fat tended to be greater in treated cows compared with control cows (3.9 vs. 3.5%). Rumen pH was similar between the 2 groups and differed across sampling times, being higher before feeding (6.3) as opposed to 2 h (5.9) and 3 h (5.7) postfeeding. Rumen lactate concentration was similar before feeding between control and treated cows; however, 2 to 3 h after feeding, lactate concentration was lower in cows receiving P. bryantii compared with control cows (0.7 vs. 1.4 mM). This difference was maintained throughout the experimental period. Concentration of NH(3)-N was greater in treated cows than in control cows (174 vs. 142 mg/L). Acetate (65.5 vs. 57.8 mM), butyrate (12.7 vs. 10.5 mM), and branched-chain C4 fatty acid (0.90 vs. 0.75 mM) concentrations were greater in postfeeding samples of treated cows compared with control cows. Supplementing early-lactating cows with P. bryantii 25A increased ruminal fermentation products and milk fat concentration. Because signs of subacute ruminal acidosis were not observed in either treated or control cows, no conclusions can be made about possible protection against acidosis by P. bryantii.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.828
Threshold uncertainty score0.236

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 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

Citations127
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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