Evaluation of a Nonstarch Polysaccharidase Feed Enzyme in Dairy Cow Diets
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this study was to evaluate a commercial feed enzyme product (Natugrain 33-L; BASF Corporation, Ludwigshafen, Germany) used mainly in poultry diets for use in ruminant diets. The product contained mainly beta-glucanase, xylanase, and endocellulase activities. The study was conducted as a double 3 x 3 Latin square design with six lactating dairy cows (84 +/- 12 DIM) to measure intake, chewing activities, total tract digestion, and milk production. An additional three cows fitted with ruminal cannulae were used to measure dietary effects on ruminal fermentation and in sacco digestion characteristics. Cows received a diet consisting of 45% forage containing 0, 1.22, or 3.67 L of enzyme product/tonne of total mixed ration (DM basis). Using a low or high concentration of enzyme supplementation increased feed intake, but total tract digestibility only increased with the low concentration of enzyme. As a result, intake of digestible nutrients was increased to a greater extent for cows fed the low concentration than for cows fed the high concentration. Because the cows used in this experiment were in positive energy balance, increased intake of digestible energy due to enzyme supplementation did not increase milk yield or milk component yield. Further research is necessary to determine the mechanism by which adding a fibrolytic enzyme mixture enhanced intake, but only increased feed digestion when used at a low level.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".