MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2030037571 · doi:10.4141/cjas07112

Meta-analysis on the effects of lipid supplementation on methane production in lactating dairy cows

2008· article· en· W2030037571 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Animal Science · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDry matterComposition (language)Milk productionAnimal scienceFood scienceLactationMilk fatChemistryBiologyPregnancy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A meta-analysis was conducted to statistically determine the effects of lipid supplementation on methane (CH 4 ) production, milk production, and milk composition of lactating dairy cows. For this purpose, a data base was built using seven scientific publications (25 diets) available in the literature and reporting the effects of lipid supplementation on CH 4 production, milk production, and milk composition. Lipid supplementation decreased (P < 0.05) dry matter intake (DMI) by 6.4% compared with control diets, whereas production of milk and 4% FCM and milk composition were not changed (P > 0.05). Lipid supplementation decreased (P < 0.05) CH 4 production by 9%, either expressed as MJ d -1 or as a percentage of gross energy intake (GEI), digestible energy intake (DEI), or metabolizable energy intake (MEI). This reduction was mainly a consequence of a decreased DMI. Key words: Meta-analysis, lipid supplementation, methane, dairy cows, lactating

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.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.831
Threshold uncertainty score0.354

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.277
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