MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2036876447 · doi:10.4141/a05-053

The impact of antemortem nutrition in beef cattle on carcass yield and quality grade

2006· article· en· W2036876447 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
A. L. Schaefer, R. W. Stanley, A. K. W. TONG, P. L. Dubeski, Barry G. Robinson, J.L. Aalhus, W. M. Robertson

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Animal Science · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMeat and Animal Product Quality
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnimal scienceBeef cattleMedicineCrossbreedLivestockCarcass weightPlaceboBody weightBiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Three thousand and thirty-six crossbred steers and heifers averaging 570 ± 7.1 kg were used in the present study to test the efficacy of providing antemortem nutrition for 12 to 24 h pre-slaughter on carcass yield, grade and meat quality. All cattle were transported for up to 6 h prior to being held overnight at one of three midwestern USA abattoir sites. While at the abattoir, the cattle were randomly assigned to one of three treatments: control (offered water only 12 to 24 h pre-slaughter, which is industry standard practice); placebo (offered 2 kg per head of a rice hull-corn-based pelleted feed for 12 to 24 h pre-slaughter plus ad libitum water); or nutritional therapy (offered 2 kg of an energy/amino acid/electrolyte product plus ad libitum water for 12 to 24 h pre-slaughter). The cattle offered antemortem nutritional therapy displayed a 20% or greater retention of quality grade score (P < 0.01) and a significant reduction in dark-firm-dry beef (P < 0.05) compared with either the placebo or control animals. In addition, animals receiving nutritional therapy treatment had a greater retention of carcass weight (≥ 2 kg, P < 0.05) compared with control cattle. Data from the present study suggest that the use of antemortem nutrition, especially for overnight-held cattle, may be effective in reducing carcass loss and quality grade reduction. Key words: Antemortem, nutrition, beef, cattle

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)0.002
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.863
Threshold uncertainty score0.909

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 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

Citations15
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Animal ScienceSame topicMeat and Animal Product QualityFrench-language works237,207