Simulation of milk production by dairy cows fed sugarcane top-based diets with locally available supplements under Indian conditions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A model of sugarcane digestion was applied to indicate the suitability of various locally available supplements for enhancing milk production of Indian crossbred dairy cattle. Milk production was calculated according to simulated energy, lipogenic, glucogenic and aminogenic substrate availability. The model identified the most limiting substrate for milk production from different sugarcane-based diets. For sugarcane tops/urea fed alone, milk production was most limited by amino acid followed by long chain fatty acid availability. Among the protein-rich oil cake supplements at 100, 200 and 300 g supplement/kg total DM, cottonseed oil cake proved superior with a milk yield of 5·5, 7·3 and 8·3 kg/day, respectively. This was followed by mustard oil cake with 5·1, 6·5 and 7·6 kg/day, respectively. In the case of a protein-rich supplement (fish meal), milk yield was limited to 6·6 kg/day due to a shortage of long chain fatty acids. However, at 300 g of supplementation, energy became limiting, with a milk yield of 6·7 kg/day. Supplementation with rice bran and rice polishings at 100, 200 and 300 g restricted milk yield to 4·3, 4·9 and 5·5 and 4·5, 5·3 and 6·1 kg/day, respectively, and amino acids became the factor limiting milk production. The diet comprising basal sugarcane tops supplemented by leguminous fodder, dry fodder (e.g. rice or wheat straw) and concentrates at levels of 100, 200 and 300 g supplements/kg total diet DM proved to be the most balanced with a milk yield of 5·1, 6·7 and 9·0 kg/day, respectively.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".