MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2022501778 · doi:10.3168/jds.2014-8151

Interaction between the physical form of the starter feed and straw provision on growth performance of Holstein calves

2014· article· en· W2022501778 on OpenAlexafffund
M. Terré, L. Castells, M. A. Khan, À. Bach

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Dairy Science · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersZoetisDairy Farmers of Canada
KeywordsStarterStrawWeaningAnimal scienceDry matterRumenBiologyFood scienceChemistryAgronomyFermentation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Two experiments were conducted to assess the effect of physical form of a starter feed with or without straw supplementation on growth performance of Holstein calves. In experiment 1, a total of 32 calves were randomly assigned at 7 d of age to texturized starter feed (containing rolled barley, corn, and oats) without straw, texturized starter feed with chopped straw, and pelleted starter feed with chopped straw. All calves were offered 4 L of pasteurized whole milk twice daily from 7 to 35 d of age, 2 L of milk twice daily from 36 to 42 d of age, and 2 L of milk from 43 to 49 d of age. Animals were weaned at 50 d of age, and the study finished when calves were 63 d old. In experiment 2, a total of 60 calves (8 d of age) were randomly assigned to texturized starter feed (containing whole corn) without straw, pelleted starter feed without straw, and pelleted starter feed with chopped straw. All calves were offered the same milk replacer (MR; 23% crude protein and 19.5 fat) at 11% dry matter concentration, 4 L/d of MR until 14 d of age, 6 L/d of MR from 14 to 37 d, 3 L/d of MR from 38 to 44 d, and 1.5 L/d of MR from 45 to 52 d of age. The experiment finished when calves were 58 d old (1 wk after weaning). Rumen liquid pH was measured after weaning. In both studies, calves were individually housed in pens on sawdust bedding and starter feed and chopped straw were offered free choice in separate buckets. In experiment 1, starter feed and straw intake and growth did not differ among treatments. However, calves receiving straw showed a greater rumen pH compared with those not receiving straw. In experiment 2, pelleted started feed supplemented with straw fostered an increase in solid feed intake (as percentage of body weight) compared with a pelleted or texturized starter feed without straw supplementation. However, calves that received the texturized starter feed containing whole corn had rumen pH similar to those fed a pelleted starter feed with straw. Feeding a texturized starter feed containing rolled barley, corn, and oats (with or without straw provision) was not able to maintain rumen pH or promote growth and intake compared with offering a pelleted starter feed with chopped straw. However, when whole corn was used in the texturized starter feed, rumen pH was equivalent to that obtained with a pelleted starter feed and straw supplementation.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations56
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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