Colostrum and milk fatty acids of dairy cows as influenced by extruded linseed supplementation during the transition period
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The effects of precalving fat sources on fatty acid (FA) profile of colostrum and milk and on metabolic parameters in early lactation were determined. Two fat supplements (target: 21% fat, DM basis) fed at 1.8 kg DM d-1 were compared: Control (C; containing fractionated palm oil rich in 16:0) and Linseed (L; containing extruded linseed, rich in 18:3n-3). Sixteen dry Holstein (n = 7) and Brown Swiss (n = 9) cows were assigned to four groups receiving the supplements from 5 wk pre- to 4 wk post-calving in different sequences: CC, CL, LC and LL. Treatments did not affect metabolic parameters, milk yield or composition. Linseed supplementation increased proportions of 18:0, 18:1, 18:2 and 18:3 in colostrum and milk (except 18:1 for colostrum). The highest n-3 FA proportion was observed in milk of LL cows. For most 16 and 18 FA, a fast response occurred within the first week of lactation for cows that switched treatments over calving. Carry-over to milk of 18:3 and its biohydrogenation products from linseed fed precalving was low. Pre-calving feeding strategies to favour incorporation of these FA into early lactation milk were not successful, but the reasons for this failure remain unclear.Key words: Linseed, omega-3 fatty acids, transition period, milk, colostrum, dairy cows
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".