Comparison of three 15N methods to correct for microbial contamination when assessing in situ protein degradability of fresh forages1
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The use of stable (15)N as a marker to determine microbial contamination in nylon bag incubation residues to estimate protein degradability was investigated. Three methods using (15)N were compared: (15)N-labeled forage (dilution method, LF), (15)N enrichment of rumen solids-associated bacteria (SAB), and (15)N enrichment of rumen liquid-associated bacteria (LAB). Herbage from forages differing in protein and fiber contents (early-cut Italian ryegrass, late-cut Italian ryegrass, and red clover) were freeze-dried and ground and then incubated in situ in the rumen of 3 steers for 3, 6, 12, 24, and 48 h using the nylon bag technique. The (15)N-labeled forages were obtained by fertilizing the plots where herbage was grown with (15)NH4 (15)NO3. Unlabeled forages (obtained from plots fertilized with NH4NO3) were incubated at the same time that ((15)NH4)2SO4 was continuously infused into the rumen of the steers, and then pellets of labeled SAB and LAB were isolated by differential centrifugation of samples of ruminal contents. The proportion of bacterial N in the incubation residues increased from 0.09 and 0.45 g bacterial N/g total N at 3 h of incubation to 0.37 and 0.85 g bacterial N/g total N at 48 h of incubation for early-cut and late-cut ryegrass, respectively. There were differences (P < 0.001) between uncorrected N degradability values and those corrected for microbial contamination with all of the methods. Apparent N degradability of the low-N, high-fiber forage (late-cut ryegrass) was 0.51, whereas the corrected values were 0.85, 0.84, and 0.77 for the LF, SAB, and LAB methods, respectively. With early-cut ryegrass and red clover, the differences between uncorrected and corrected values ranged between 6% and 13%, with small differences among the labeling methods. Generally, methods using labeled forage or labeled SAB and LAB provided similar corrected degradability values. The accuracy in estimating the extent of degradation of protein in the rumen from in situ disappearance curves is improved when values are corrected for microbial contamination of the bag residue.
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 | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".