MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2016537916 · doi:10.2527/jas.2011-4372

Wheat distillers grains in feedlot cattle diets: Feeding behavior, growth performance, carcass characteristics, and blood metabolites1,2

2011· article· en· W2016537916 on OpenAlexaff
Wen Yang, Y. L. Li, Tim A. McAllister, J. J. McKinnon, K. A. Beauchemin

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Animal Science · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of SaskatchewanAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFeedlotSilageDistillers grainsDry matterCrossbreedMealAnimal scienceBiologyBeef cattleAgronomyFood scienceChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A study was conducted to evaluate feed intake, ADG, carcass quality, eating behavior, and blood metabolites in feedlot beef steers fed diets that varied in proportion of wheat dried distillers grains with solubles (DDGS) replacing barley grain or barley silage. Two hundred crossbred steers (BW = 489 ± 30 kg) were blocked by BW and randomly allotted to 20 pens (5 pens per treatment). Steers were fed 1 of 4 diets: control without DDGS (CON), 25% (25DDGS), 30% (30DDGS), or 35% (35DDGS) wheat DDGS (DM basis). The CON diet consisted of 15% barley silage and 85% barley-based concentrate; the 3 wheat DDGS diets were formulated by substituting 20% barley grain and 5, 10, or 15% silage, respectively, with 25, 30, or 35% wheat DDGS so that the 35DDGS diet contained no silage. The diets were formulated such that wheat DDGS was substituted for both barley grain and barley silage to evaluate whether wheat DDGS can be fed as a source of both energy and fiber in feedlot finishing diets. Dry matter intake of steers fed 25DDGS was greater (P < 0.01), but final BW, ADG, and G:F were not different compared with steers fed CON diet. Carcass characteristics and liver abscess score were not different between CON and 25DDGS. Steers fed 25DDGS had longer eating time (min/d; P < 0.01), greater meal frequency (P < 0.04), but a slower eating rate (P < 0.04). Replacing barley silage with increasing amounts of wheat DDGS (from 25DDGS to 35DDGS) linearly reduced (P < 0.01) DMI. Final BW, ADG, and G:F were not affected by increasing amounts of wheat DDGS. Carcass traits were not different, whereas liver abscess scores linearly (P < 0.01) increased as more barley silage was replaced by wheat DDGS. Eating time (min/d) and duration of each meal linearly (P < 0.02) decreased, whereas eating rate (min/g of DM) linearly (P < 0.01) increased with increasing replacement of barley silage. Blood urea N was doubled (P < 0.01) compared with CON by inclusion of wheat DDGS. Results indicate that wheat DDGS can be used effectively in feedlot diets, decreasing the need for barley grain or silage without negatively affecting growth performance and carcass characteristics. A reduction in the amount of roughage required to maintain growth performance is a potential advantage in feedlot operations because forage is costly and often of limited availability. Thus, DDGS can be a possible alternative as long as they are available and cost effective; however, increased incidence of liver abscess and increased N content of manure need to be considered when greater amounts of wheat DDGS are included in finishing diets.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.592
Threshold uncertainty score0.185

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.035
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.200 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations57
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Animal ScienceSame topicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive PhysiologyFrench-language works237,207