Prediction of Methane Production from Dairy and Beef Cattle
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Methane (CH4) is one of the major greenhouse gases being targeted for reduction by the Kyoto protocol. The focus of recent research in animal science has thus been to develop or improve existing CH4 prediction models to evaluate mitigation strategies to reduce overall CH4 emissions. Eighty-three beef and 89 dairy data sets were collected and used to develop statistical models of CH4 production using dietary variables. Dry matter intake (DMI), metabolizable energy intake, neutral detergent fiber, acid detergent fiber, ether extract, lignin, and forage proportion were considered in the development of models to predict CH4 emissions. Extant models relevant to the study were also evaluated. For the beef database, the equation CH4 (MJ/d) = 2.94 (+/- 1.16) + 0.059 (+/- 0.0201) x metabolizable energy intake (MJ/d) + 1.44 (+/- 0.331) x acid detergent fiber (kg/d) - 4.16 (+/- 1.93) x lignin (kg/d) resulted in the lowest root mean square prediction error (RMSPE) value (14.4%), 88% of which was random error. For the dairy database, the equation CH4 (MJ/d) = 8.56 (+/- 2.63) + 0.14 (+/- 0.056) x forage (%) resulted in the lowest RMSPE value (20.6%) and 57% of error from random sources. An equation based on DMI also performed well for the dairy database: CH4 (MJ/d) = 3.23 (+/- 1.12) + 0.81 (+/- 0.086) x DMI (kg/d), with a RMSPE of 25.6% and 91% of error from random sources. When the dairy and beef databases were combined, the equation CH4 (MJ/d) = 3.27 (+/- 0.79) + 0.74 (+/- 0.074) x DMI (kg/d) resulted in the lowest RMSPE value (28.2%) and 83% of error from random sources. Two of the 9 extant equations evaluated predicted CH4 production adequately. However, the new models based on more commonly determined values showed an improvement in predictions over extant equations.
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.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it