Relationships among measures of growth performance and efficiency with carcass traits, visceral organ mass, and pancreatic digestive enzymes in feedlot cattle1,2
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ninety-three crossbred steer calves (BW+/-SD=385+/-50 kg) were used (n=48 steers in yr 1, n=45 steers in yr 2) to examine the relationship among carcass traits, lean, bone, and fat proportions, visceral tissue weights, and pancreatic digestive enzyme activity with DMI, ADG, G:F, and residual feed intake. Calves were progeny from crossbred dams predominantly of Angus and Simmental breeding and were sired by Angus, Simmental, crossbred (predominantly of Angus and Simmental breeding), Charolais, or Piedmontese bulls. Steers were fed a high-moisture corn-based diet for an average of 112 d. Partial correlation analysis accounting for year, pen within year, week of slaughter within year, and sire breed was conducted. Gain:feed was negatively correlated (P <or= 0.04) with backfat thickness (r= -0.38), marbling score (r= -0.32), and trim and kidney fat weight proportion (g/kg of BW; r= -0.42). Residual feed intake (P=0.008; g/kg of BW; r=0.34) and backfat-corrected residual feed intake (P=0.005; r=0.29) were positively correlated with trim and kidney fat weight proportion. Gain:feed was negatively correlated (P<0.001) with total fat weight proportion (g/kg of rib; r= -0.45) and positively correlated (P <or= 0.03) with lean weight proportion (g/kg of rib; r=0.30) and bone weight proportion (g/kg of rib; r=0.28). Gain:feed was negatively correlated (P <or= 0.01) with subcutaneous fat weight proportion (g/kg of rib; r= -0.32) and intramuscular fat weight proportion (g/ kg of rib; r=0.37). Gain:feed was negatively correlated (P<0.001) with total visceral weight proportion (g/kg of BW; r= -0.44) and visceral fat weight proportion (g/kg of BW; r= -0.41) but was positively correlated (P=0.02) with spleen weight proportion (g/kg of BW; r=0.30). There were no significant correlations (P>0.10) between performance measures and the pancreatic proportional content of alpha-amylase and trypsin activity (units/kg of BW). These data indicate that carcass fatness traits and changes in the proportional weight of total viscera may be negatively associated with G:F and that visceral fat weight proportion and trim and kidney fat weight proportion may be important factors influencing this relationship.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".