MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2019454870 · doi:10.4141/p99-087

A review of the development of a bloat-reduced alfalfa cultivar

2000· review· en· W2019454870 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Bruce Coulman, B. P. Goplen, W. Majak, Tim A. McAllister, K.-J. Cheng, B. P. Berg, John W. Hall, D. H. McCartney, S. N. Acharya

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Plant Science · 2000
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyRumenLegumeCultivarPopulationDigestion (alchemy)AgronomyGrazingForageAnimal scienceFood scienceFermentationChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The studies that led to the development of a bloat-reduced alfalfa began in 1970. Initial work focused on the causes of bloat, the characteristics of bloat-safe and bloat-causing legumes and the development of screening methodologies. The characteristics that were examined as causal factors of bloat in legume species included soluble proteins, saponins, absence of condensed tannins, and rapid breakdown of cells in the rumen. The factor or combination of factors responsible for causing bloat in animals grazing legumes have not been clearly identified; however, of the above, rapid cell breakdown was considered to be the most promising line of research to pursue in selecting a bloat-safe legume. A 4-h nylon-bag rumen digestion technique was developed, which was used to assess the initial rate of digestion (IRD) of fresh leaf material in large numbers of alfalfa genotypes. Using this technique on a population of four alfalfa cultivars, four cycles of recurrent selection for low initial rate of digestion (LIRD) were carried out over an 11-yr period. The resulting selected population, LIRD-4, had a vegetative stage initial rate of digestion that was approximately 85% of that of unselected alfalfa. To determine whether this reduction in IRD would reduce or eliminate bloat, grazing experiments comparing LIRD-4 and unselected cv. Beaver were conducted at three locations over 3 yr. Over all grazings, LIRD-4 caused significantly fewer incidences of bloat than Beaver; thus it is a bloat-reduced, rather than a bloat-safe cultivar. LIRD-4 was released in 1997 and named AC Grazeland Br. Key words: Bloat, cattle, alfalfa, low initial rate of digestion, grazing, bloat-reduced alfalfa

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.987
Threshold uncertainty score0.543

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations53
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Plant ScienceSame topicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive PhysiologyFrench-language works237,207