Effects of Forage Particle Size and Grain Fermentability in Midlactation Cows. I. Milk Production and Diet Digestibility
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Our study investigated the effects of, and interactions between, level of dietary ruminally fermentable carbohydrate (RFC) and forage particle size on milk production, nutrient digestibility, and microbial protein yield for dairy cows fed one level of dietary NDF. Eight cows (61 days in milk) were assigned to four treatments in a double 4 x 4 Latin square. Treatments were arranged in a 2 x 2 factorial design; finely chopped alfalfa silage (FS) and coarse alfalfa silage (CS) were combined with concentrates based on either dry cracked shelled corn (DC; low RFC) or ground high-moisture corn (HMC; high RFC). Diets were fed ad libitum as a total mixed rations with a concentrate to forage ratio of 61:39. Diets based on DC had a predicted NEL content of 1.73 Mcallkg dry matter (DM), while HMC diets contained 1.80 Mcal/kg DM. Diets averaged 18.7% CP, 24.0% NDF, 18.3% ADF, and 27.4% starch on a DM basis. Mean particle size of the four diets was 6.3, 2.8, 6.0, and 3.0 mm for DCCS, DCFS, HMCCS, and HMCFS, respectively. Increasing level of RFC decreased dry matter intake (DMI) from 25.0 to 23.8 kg/ d and organic matter intake from 22.3 to 21.1 kg/d, but intake was not affected by particle size. Milk production averaged 44.0 and 26.8 kg/d solids corrected milk (SCM) and was not affected by diet, but increasing level of RFC tended to increase milk yield. Efficiency of milk production, expressed as SCM/DMI, increased from 1.06 to 1.14 when level of RFC was increased. Milk composition or yield of milk components was not affected by diet, and averaged 3.53% fat, 3.11% protein, 1.55 kg/d fat, and 1.36 kg/d protein. Total tract digestibility of DM and OM increased from 71.4 to 73.0% and 72.4 to 76.1% for DM and OM, respectively, when level of RFC was increased. Total tract digestibility of fiber was unaffected by diet, but total tract starch digestibility increased from 93.1 to 97.4% when HMC replaced DC. Total urinary excretion of the purine derivatives uric acid and allantoin increased from 415 to 472 mmol/d when level of RFC was increased, and calculated microbial N supply increased from 315 to 365 g/d. When expressed as per kilogram of digestible OMI, increasing level of RFC tended to increase microbial N supply (20.4 vs. 22.2 g/kg). Cow productivity was not affected by forage particle size and ruminally fermentable carbohydrates in this study.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".