MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2040879896 · doi:10.3168/jds.2007-0402

Effects of Photoperiod and Glucose-Supplemented Drinking Water on the Performance of Dairy Calves

2007· article· en· W2040879896 on OpenAlexafffund
V.R. Osborne, N. E. Odongo, A. Michelle Edwards, B.W. McBride

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Dairy Science · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaDairy Farmers of Ontario
KeywordsAnimal sciencephotoperiodismDairy cattleBiologyChemistryBotany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Long-day photoperiods (LDPP) have been shown to increase milk production in lactating dairy cattle. The objective of this study was to determine the effects of supplemental light and glucose-supplemented drinking water on starter dry matter intake (DMI), water intake, serum and rumen metabolites, and growth performance of calves from birth to 8 wk of age. The experiment was conducted as a completely randomized design with a 2 x 2 factorial arrangement of treatments. The calves were assigned at birth to 1 of 4 treatments: 1) 10 h of light, 14 h of dark (short-day photoperiods; SDPP), ad libitum intake of water, and no glucose supplementation; 2) 10 h of light, 14 h of dark, and ad libitum intake of water supplemented with 50 g of glucose/L; 3) 18 h of light, 6 h of dark (LDPP), and ad libitum intake of water, and no glucose supplementation; and 4) 18 h of light, 6 h of dark, and ad libitum intake of water supplemented with 50 g of glucose/L. Fluorescent lights were used to provide lighting at an intensity of approximately 600 lx at the eye level of calves. The calves were bucket-fed 2 L of whole milk offered twice daily at 0700 and 1600 h and had a free access to a textured calf starter. The calves on LDPP were heavier at d 56 than SDPP calves regardless of level of glucose supplementation. The average daily gain of the calves on LDPP from d 29 to 42 and from d 43 to 56 was greater than for SDPP calves regardless of the level of glucose supplementation. The greater average daily gain of LDPP calves from d 29 to 56 coincided with the greater calf starter DMI of these calves. Body widths through hooks were highly (r = 0.72) correlated with body weights, which in turn were related to calf starter DMI. Calves on LDPP had greater ruminal osmolarity and greater concentrations of acetate, propionate, butyrate, and total volatile fatty acids than SDPP calves regardless of the level of glucose supplementation. Calves on LDPP had lower Ca:P ratio than the SDPP calves regardless of level of glucose supplementation. The concentrations of serum glucose and sodium for the glucose-supplemented calves were greater than for nonsupplemented calves regardless of lighting regimen. These results suggest that LDPP encouraged greater consumption of calf starter, which stimulated faster rumen development in the LDPP calves as evidenced by greater volatile fatty acid concentrations.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.235
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Dairy Science→Same topicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology→French-language works237,207→