MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2048928413 · doi:10.3168/jds.2008-1569

Timothy silage with low dietary cation-anion difference fed to nonlactating cows

2009· article· en· W2048928413 on OpenAlexafffund
Édith Charbonneau, P.Y. Chouinard, Gaëtan F. Tremblay, G. Allard, D. Pellerin

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Dairy Science · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaUniversité Laval
FundersMinistère de l'Agriculture et de l'AlimentationFonds Québécois de la Recherche sur la Nature et les TechnologiesBARDMinistère de l'Agriculture, des Pêcheries et de l'AlimentationMinistry of Agriculture - SaskatchewanChurch and DwightUniversité Laval
KeywordsSilageAnimal scienceChemistryDry matterLatin squareIce calvingHayForageUrineLactationRumenFermentationFood scienceBiochemistryBiologyAgronomyPregnancy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Decreasing the dietary cation-anion difference (DCAD) by using anion sources before calving reduces hypocalcemia in cows at calving. Reduced DCAD from CaCl2-fertilized timothy hay achieves similar results, but the effects of feeding low-DCAD forage as silage have not been determined. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of low-DCAD timothy silage on dry cows. Six nonlactating and nonpregnant Holstein cows were used in a replicated 3 x 3 Latin square. Treatments were 1) control diet (DCAD = 232 mEq/kg of dry matter, DM); 2) low-DCAD diet using a low-DCAD timothy silage (LDTS; DCAD = -21 mEq/kg of DM); and 3) low-DCAD diet using a fermentation by-product (LDBP; DCAD = -32 mEq/kg of DM). Differences between dietary treatments were considered statistically significant at P < or = 0.05 and tendencies were noted when 0.05 < P < 0.10. Compared with the control, feeding LDTS tended to decrease DM intake (10.6 vs. 12.5 kg/d) and decreased urinary pH (6.15 vs. 8.18) as well as apparent digestibility of DM (67 vs. 69%). Blood pH (7.37 vs. 7.42), HCO3- (25.3 vs. 27.5 mM), and base excess (0.4 vs. 3.1 mM) were decreased, and blood Cl- (29.6 vs. 29.1 mg/dL) was increased. Apparently absorbed Na and Cl were higher and apparently absorbed K, P, and digested ADF were lower for LDTS compared with the control. Both LDTS and LDBP resulted in similar DM intake. Urinary pH tended to be higher (6.15 vs. 5.98) and percentage of digested DM was lower (67 vs. 70%) with LDTS compared with LDBP. Blood ionized Ca (5.3 vs. 5.4 mg/dL) tended to be lower and blood Cl- (29.6 vs. 30.1 mg/dL) was lower, whereas blood pH (7.37 vs. 7.33), HCO3- (25.3 vs. 21.5 mM), and base excess (0.4 vs. -3.8 mM) were higher with LDTS compared with LDBP. Apparent absorption of Na, Cl, S, and P, as well as apparent digestion of acid detergent fiber, neutral detergent fiber, and N were lower, and K, Cl, S, P, Mg, and N were less retained with LDTS compared with LDBP. Results confirm that low-DCAD timothy silage can be used to produce a compensated metabolic acidosis by decreasing the DCAD of rations served to nonlactating dairy cows.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 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

Citations6
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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