MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2033475333 · doi:10.2527/jas.2007-0342

Effects of supplementing fish oil in the drinking water of dairy cows on production performance and milk fatty acid composition1

2007· article· en· W2033475333 on OpenAlexaff
V.R. Osborne, S. Radhakrishnan, N. E. Odongo, A.R. Hill, B.W. McBride

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Animal Science · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMilkingAnimal scienceFish oilDry matterFatty acidMenhadenDairy cattleMilk productionCompletely randomized designChemistryMilk fatFood scienceBiologyFish <Actinopterygii>FisheryBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this study was to determine the effects of supplementing fish oil (FO) in the drinking water of dairy cows on production performance and milk fatty acid composition. Sixteen multiparous Holstein dairy cows (741 +/- 84 kg of BW; 60 +/- 2.3 d in milk, mean +/- SD) housed in a tie-stall facility were used in the study. The study was conducted as a completely randomized design with repeated measurements. The cows were blocked by days in milk and allocated to 1 of 2 treatments: 10 g of menhaden FO/kg of DM top-dressed on the total mixed ration (FOT), and 2 g of menhaden FO/L delivered in the drinking water (FOW). The trial lasted for 5 wk: a 1-wk pretreatment adjustment period and 4 wk of treatment. The animals were fed and milked twice daily (feeding at 0830 and 1300; milking at 0500 and 1500) and had unlimited access to water. Dry matter intake (21.3 kg/d for FOT vs. 22.7 +/- 0.74 kg/d for FOW), milk yield (38.2 kg/d for FOT vs. 39.5 +/- 1.9 kg/d for FOW), and water intake (101 L/d for FOT vs. 107 +/- 4.4 L/d for FOW) were not affected by treatment. The mode of delivery of FO had no effect on milk fat percentage, but milk fat percentage declined linearly with time. The fatty acid contents of 7:0; 8:0; 9:0; 10:0; 12:0 in the milk of FOT cows were lower than for FOW cows, whereas 18:1 trans-12; 18:1 trans-13 and 14; 18:1 trans-16; and trans-9, trans-11 plus trans-10, trans-12 CLA were greater for FOT than for FOW. The contents of 24:1 in the milk of FOW cows were 48% greater than for FOT cows, although the concentrations were low in both groups. There was a tendency for the contents of 14:0 and 22:5n-6 to be greater in FOW cows than FOT cows and for the contents of iso-18:0 to be lower for FOW cows than for FOT cows. Although it appears that the amount of FO added in the study did not bypass the rumen as hypothesized, these results suggest that drinking water can be an alternative for supplementing FO to dairy cows without decreasing feed or water intake relative to cows fed FO in the diet.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.482
Threshold uncertainty score0.098

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations16
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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