Effects of feeding triticale dried distillers grains plus solubles as a nitrogen source on productivity of lactating dairy cows
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this study was to compare triticale dried distillers grains plus solubles (TDDGS) as a source of dietary N with other high-protein feeds commonly used in North America: corn dried distillers grains plus solubles (CDDGS), canola meal (CM), and soybean meal (SBM). Rumen degradable protein (% of crude protein, CP) after 16h of incubation in the rumen was higher for CDDGS and TDDGS (69.3% and 64.5%, respectively) than for CM (62.2%) and SBM (53.0%). For the lactation study, experimental diets were formulated to supply 30% of dietary CP from TDDGS, CDDGS, CM, or SBM. These diets contained 22.3% forage neutral detergent fiber and approximately 19.2% CP and were fed to 12 multiparous Holstein cows (130+/-40 d in milk) in a 4 x 12 Latin rectangle design with 21-d periods. Neither dry matter intake nor milk yield was affected by treatment, averaging 25.5 and 35.5kg/d, respectively. Plasma concentrations of Arg, Lys, and Thr were greater for cows fed CM or SBM compared with those fed TDDGS or CDDGS, whereas plasma concentrations of Leu and Phe were lower for cows fed CM or SBM compared with those fed TDDGS or CDDGS. Cows fed CDDGS had lower milk CP yield compared with cows fed CM (1.07 vs. 1.16kg/d). Contrarily, milk CP and milk lactose yields were not different for cows fed TDDGS compared with CM or SBM. These data suggest that TDDGS can replace CM or SBM in the diets of lactating dairy cows without adverse effects on production. Furthermore, although dried distillers grain has been generally accepted as a feed high in ruminal undegradable protein, CDDGS and TDDGS used in the present study had high in situ ruminal degradable crude protein. Further investigation is warranted to determine the extent of variation in ruminal protein degradation among different types of dried distillers grains.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".