A study on the variation of feed efficiency in station tested beef bulls
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The records of 282 young beef bulls from eight breeds tested from November 1981 to April 1987 at the Ellerslie Bull Test Station, Alberta, Canada, were used to study the variation in feed efficiency among young performance-tested bulls. Considerable variation existed among the animals in both residual metabolizable energy consumption and residual dry matter consumption. The heritability estimates for residual metabolizable energy consumption and residual dry matter consumption were 0.33 and 0.29, respectively. In addition, residual metabolizable energy consumption and residual dry matter consumption were moderately correlated (r = 0.43) with conventional feed-to-gain ratio, indicating that conventional feed-to-gain ratio only accounted for 18% of the variation in residual metabolizable energy consumption or residual dry matter consumption. It was, therefore, worthwhile to use residual metabolizable energy consumption or residual dry matter consumption as separate measures of feed efficiency. For rapid improvement in feed efficiency in beef cattle, selection pressure should be applied to both growth traits and residual energy consumption or residual dry matter consumption. Multi-trait optimum restricted selection indices and similar selection procedures may serve as useful means in balanced selection programs to improve the productivity of beef cattle. Key words: Feed efficiency, residual ME consumption, beef bulls
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".