MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2016864843 · doi:10.2527/jas.2014-7859

Characterization of ruminal temperature and its relationship with ruminal pH in beef heifers fed growing and finishing diets1

2014· article· en· W2016864843 on OpenAlexaff
Riazuddin Mohammed, Martin Hünerberg, Tim A. McAllister, K. A. Beauchemin

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Animal Science · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnimal scienceBeef cattleChemistryRumenAgronomyBiologyFood scienceFermentation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study characterized the relationship between ruminal temperature (T rum) and pH in beef cattle fed growing and finishing diets. In Exp. 1, 16 ruminally cannulated beef heifers (388.5 ± 34.9 kg BW) were fed 4 growing diets in a replicated 4 × 4 Latin square with four 21-d periods. Diets were (DM basis) grower control (CTLg; 35% barley grain plus 5% canola meal), 40% corn dried distillers grains plus solubles (CDDGSg), 40% wheat dried distillers grains plus solubles (WDDGSg), and 37.6% WDDGSg plus 2.4% corn oil (WDDGSg+O). All diets contained 55% barley silage (DM basis). Ruminal pH and T rum were continuously monitored for 4 d each period starting on d 18. In Exp. 2, the 16 heifers were gradually transitioned (529.1 ± 41.1 kg BW) from the growing diets to 1 of 4 finishing diets in a replicated 4 × 4 Latin square with four 28-d periods. Diets were (DM basis) finisher control (CTL f), 40% corn-based distillers grains plus solubles (CDDGS f), 40% wheat-based distillers grains plus solubles (WDDGS f), and 37.4% WDDGSf + 2.6% corn oil (WDDGS f+O). All finishing diets contained 8% barley silage (DM basis). Ruminal pH and T rum were measured from d 25 to 28. With growing diets (n = 64), maximum T rum was negatively related to minimum pH (P < 0.001, r = -0.53) and positively related to starch intake (P < 0.001, r = 0.55). Maximum T rum, T rum > 40°C (h/d), and area under the curve (AUC) T rum > 38°C (area × h/d) accounted for 28.3, 9.5, and 4.7%, respectively, of the variability in minimum pH (R(2) = 0.43, P < 0.001, n = 64). Mean T rum and maximum T rum were greater for CTL g than CDDGS g, WDDGS g, and WDDGS g+O. With finishing diets (n = 63), maximum T rum was negatively related to minimum ruminal pH (P < 0.001, r = -0.63) and positively related to DMI (P < 0.001, r = 0.62) and to starch intake (P < 0.001, r = 0.58). Maximum T rum, AUC T rum > 39°C, and duration T rum > 38°C accounted for 40, 17, and 3.6%, respectively, of the variability in minimum pH (R(2) = 0.60, P < 0.001, n = 63). Mean T rum and maximum T rum were greater for CTL f than CDDGS f, WDDGS f, and WDDGS f+O. When individual animal data were examined, heifers with duration T rum > 40°C did not necessarily have greater duration pH < 5.2 or pH < 5.5. Ruminal temperature has the potential to predict ruminal pH, likely owing to the biological relationship between acid production and the heat of fermentation. Exploitation of this relationship to predict pH could provide a means of overcoming the problems associated with long-term monitoring of ruminal pH using electrode-based approaches.

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)0.001
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 score0.893
Threshold uncertainty score0.131

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.212 · 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

Citations12
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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