Evaluation of wheat or corn dried distillers’ grains with solubles on performance and carcass characteristics of feedlot steers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A study was conducted on crossbred steers (n = 275; 376 ± 24 kg) to evaluate performance and carcass quality of cattle fed wheat or corn dried distillers’ grains with solubles (DDGS). The control ration contained 86.6% rolled barley grain, 5.7% supplement and 7.7% barley silage (DM basis). The four treatments included replacement of barley grain at 20 or 40% of the diet (DM basis) with wheat or corn DDGS. Steers were slaughtered at a common end weight of 645 kg with 100 steers randomly (n = 20 per treatment) selected for determination of the retail yield of sub-primal boneless boxed beef (SPBBB). Data were analyzed as a completely randomized design using pen as the experimental unit. Feeding increasing levels of wheat DDGS led to a quadratic increase in dry matter intake (DMI) (P < 0.01), whereas increasing levels of corn DDGS led to a quadratic decrease in DMI (P = 0.01). Average daily gain was not influenced (P = 0.13) by feeding wheat or corn DDGS, but cattle fed corn DDGS exhibited a quadratic increase (P = 0.01) in gain:feed. As a result, a quadratic increase (P < 0.01) in calculated NE g of the diet was observed as corn DDGS levels increased. A linear decrease (P = 0.04) in days on feed (169, 166 and 154 d) was noted when increasing levels of wheat DDGS (0, 20 and 40%) were fed. Dressing percentage increased in a linear fashion with wheat DDGS (P < 0.01) inclusion level and in a quadratic fashion (P = 0.01) as corn DDGS inclusion level increased although other carcass traits were not affected (P > 0.10) by treatment. The results indicate that replacement of barley grain with corn or wheat DDGS up to 40% of the diet (DM) can lead to superior performance (improved gain:feed or reduced days on feed, respectively) with no detrimental effect on quality grade or carcass SPBBB yield.Key words: Dried distillers’ grains with solubles, corn, wheat, feedlot performance, carcass quality, steers
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".