Chemical composition, ruminal kinetic parameters, and nutrient digestibility of ammonia treated oat hulls
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A study was conducted to determine the effects of ammoniation (3 or 5% by dry weight) on the nutritive value of oat hulls. Ruminal nutrient kinetic parameters and degradability of untreated and ammoniated oat hulls were determined using two non-lactating cows fitted with rumen cannulas. Eighteen steers were used in a digestibility trial to determine nutrient utilization of three diets consisting of 100% barley silage, 50% untreated oat hulls plus 50% barley silage, and 50% ammoniated oat hulls plus 50% barley silage (DM basis). Ammoniation at both levels increased (P < 0.05) total N and reduced (P < 0.05) neutral detergent fibre levels of oat hulls. Most of the N added due to ammoniation was in the form of non-protein N. The results of the in situ trial showed that ammoniation at the 3% level increased the potentially degradable NDF and ADF fractions as well as their rates of degradation. Ammoniation at the 3% level improved (P < 0.05) effective ruminal degradability of NDF and ADF of oat hulls by 41 and 35%, respectively. Dry matter intake was highest (P < 0.05) for steers fed the ammoniated oat hull diets, intermediate for those fed the untreated oat hull diets and lowest (P < 0.05) for those fed the 100% barley silage diet. Steers fed the ammoniated oat hull diet had higher (P < 0.05) total tract digestibility of NDF and lignin relative to steers fed the untreated oat hull diet. However, total tract digestibility of dry matter was not affected by ammoniation. It was concluded that ammoniation is a viable method for improving the feeding value of oat hulls to ruminant animals. Relative to the 3% level, ammoniation at 5% resulted in a marginal improvement in the nutritive value of oat hulls. Key words: Ammonia treatment, oat hulls, ruminal degradation, nutrient utilization
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".