MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2033447499 · doi:10.1017/s0021859609990499

Simulating the effects of grassland management and grass ensiling on methane emission from lactating cows

2009· article· en· W2033447499 on OpenAlex
A. Bannink, M.C.J. Smits, E. Kebreab, John Mills, J.L. Ellis, A. Klop, J. France, J. Dijkstra

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.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Agricultural Science · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDry matterSilageForageFermentationRumenAnimal scienceHuman fertilizationChemistryAgronomySubstrate (aquarium)BiologyGrasslandFood scienceEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

SUMMARY A dynamic, mechanistic model of enteric fermentation was used to investigate the effect of type and quality of grass forage, dry matter intake (DMI) and proportion of concentrates in dietary dry matter (DM) on variation in methane (CH 4 ) emission from enteric fermentation in dairy cows. The model represents substrate degradation and microbial fermentation processes in rumen and hindgut and, in particular, the effects of type of substrate fermented and of pH on the production of individual volatile fatty acids and CH 4 as end-products of fermentation. Effects of type and quality of fresh and ensiled grass were evaluated by distinguishing two N fertilization rates of grassland and two stages of grass maturity. Simulation results indicated a strong impact of the amount and type of grass consumed on CH 4 emission, with a maximum difference (across all forage types and all levels of DMI) of 49 and 77% in g CH 4 /kg fat and protein corrected milk (FCM) for diets with a proportion of concentrates in dietary DM of 0·1 and 0·4, respectively (values ranging from 10·2 to 19·5 g CH 4 /kg FCM). The lowest emission was established for early cut, high fertilized grass silage (GS) and high fertilized grass herbage (GH). The highest emission was found for late cut, low-fertilized GS. The N fertilization rate had the largest impact, followed by stage of grass maturity at harvesting and by the distinction between GH and GS. Emission expressed in g CH 4 /kg FCM declined on average 14% with an increase of DMI from 14 to 18 kg/day for grass forage diets with a proportion of concentrates of 0·1, and on average 29% with an increase of DMI from 14 to 23 kg/day for diets with a proportion of concentrates of 0·4. Simulation results indicated that a high proportion of concentrates in dietary DM may lead to a further reduction of CH 4 emission per kg FCM mainly as a result of a higher DMI and milk yield, in comparison to low concentrate diets. Simulation results were evaluated against independent data obtained at three different laboratories in indirect calorimetry trials with cows consuming GH mainly. The model predicted the average of observed values reasonably, but systematic deviations remained between individual laboratories and root mean squared prediction error was a proportion of 0·12 of the observed mean. Both observed and predicted emission expressed in g CH 4 /kg DM intake decreased upon an increase in dietary N:organic matter (OM) ratio. The model reproduced reasonably well the variation in measured CH 4 emission in cattle sheds on Dutch dairy farms and indicated that on average a fraction of 0·28 of the total emissions must have originated from manure under these circumstances.

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)0.000
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 score0.892
Threshold uncertainty score0.267

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.230 · 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