MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2063817074 · doi:10.3168/jds.2014-8782

Short communication: Feed sorting of dairy heifers is influenced by method of dietary transition

2015· article· en· W2063817074 on OpenAlexafffund
E.K. Miller-Cushon, Joseane Vogel, T.J. DeVries

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Dairy Science · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
Canadian institutionsKellogg's (Canada)University of Guelph
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSilageTotal mixed rationDry matterAnimal scienceNeutral Detergent FiberChemistryDairy cattleFood scienceBiologyLactation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigated the effect of exposing heifers to individual feed components on the extent and pattern of feed sorting upon transition to a novel ration. Holstein heifers (394 ± 62 d old, weighing 409.8 ± 37.3 kg; mean ± SD), consuming a familiar mixed silage-based ration [55% corn silage and 45% haylage, dry matter (DM) basis], were transitioned to a novel total mixed ration [TMR; 41.6% haylage, 36.5% corn silage, 14.6% high-moisture corn, and 7.3% protein supplement, DM basis] by 1 of 2 treatments: direct transition to novel TMR (DIR; n = 5) or exposure to novel TMR components individually before receiving novel TMR (COM; n = 6). During the baseline period (d 1 to 4), all heifers were offered the familiar silage-based ration. During transition (d 5 to 12), DIR heifers received the novel TMR, whereas COM heifers received the novel TMR components offered separately, in amounts according to TMR composition (target 15% orts). After transition (d 13 to 20), all heifers received the novel TMR. Feed intake and feeding time were determined daily and fresh feed and individual orts were sampled every 2d for particle size analysis and neutral detergent fiber content. The particle size separator consisted of 3 screens (18, 9, and 1.18 mm) and a bottom pan, resulting in 4 fractions (long, medium, short, and fine). Sorting activity for each fraction was calculated as actual intake expressed as a percentage of predicted intake. We detected no effect of treatment on dry matter intake or feeding time. After transition to the novel TMR, COM heifers sorted to a greater extent than did DIR heifers, sorting against long particles (95.4 vs. 98.9%) and for short particles (101.7 vs. 100.6%). Differences in sorting patterns resulted in COM heifers tending to have lower neutral detergent fiber intake as a percentage of predicted intake (98.9 vs. 100.5%). The results of this study suggest that the degree of feed sorting may be influenced by method of transition to a novel ration.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
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)0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.259 · 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

Citations5
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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