MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2000481887 · doi:10.1071/ea05227

Effect of different post-weaning growth paths on long-term weight gain, carcass characteristics and eating quality of beef cattle

2006· article· en· W2000481887 on OpenAlexaff
N. W. Tomkins, G. S. Harper, Heather L. Bruce, R. A. Hunter

Bibliographic record

VenueAustralian Journal of Experimental Agriculture · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMeat and Animal Product Quality
Canadian institutionsMaple Leaf Foods
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnimal scienceWeaningPastureCarcass weightBiologyWeight gainEnvironmental management systemLongissimus dorsiWeight lossCompensatory growth (organ)Beef cattleBody weightIrrigationAgronomyEndocrinologyObesity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The effects of post-weaning nutrient restriction on growth, carcass characteristics and beef quality were determined. Belmont Red weaner steers (n = 100) were allocated to an initial slaughter group and 3 treatment groups of 120 days duration: rapid growth, slow growth and weight loss. The average daily gain of the groups were (mean ± s.e.): 0.81 ± 0.02, 0.29 ± 0.02 and –0.22 ± 0.01 kg/day, for the rapid growth, slow growth and weight loss groups, respectively. At the end of the treatment period, rapid growth steers had significantly (P<0.05) heavier carcasses, higher dressing percentages and greater bone mineral contents than those from the weight loss group. Steers from each group were realimented for 192 days at pasture. Average daily gains during this period were 0.39 ± 0.03, 0.52 ± 0.04 and 0.61 ± 0.05 kg/day for the rapid growth, slow growth and weight loss groups, respectively. Ten animals from the rapid growth group were then slaughtered to determine carcass characteristics. The remaining steers were finished at pasture for a further 409 days. During this period there was no significant difference in average daily gain between treatment groups. Steers from the rapid growth group had a significantly greater final weight (531 ± 16.8 kg) compared with weight loss steers (481 ± 14.0 kg). Carcass characteristics, eye muscle area, bone mineral content and objective measures of meat quality for the M. longissimus dorsi and M. semitendinosus did not differ significantly between groups. Shear peak force values for cooked M. longissimus dorsi samples were not significantly different between groups. Clipped meat quality scores for M. longissimus dorsi samples, as assessed by Meat Standards Australia, were not significantly different between treatment groups and indicated consumer acceptability. It was concluded that nutrient restriction in the immediate post-weaning period followed by pasture realimentation did not influence final carcass characteristics or beef quality.

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)0.000
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 score0.308
Threshold uncertainty score0.343

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations17
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAustralian Journal of Experimental AgricultureSame topicMeat and Animal Product QualityFrench-language works237,207