Effects of dietary sunflower seeds on rumen protozoa and growth of lambs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Linoleic acid-rich sunflower-seed supplements (SSS) were used in two experiments (experiment 1, high-concentrate diets; experiment 2, high-forage diets) to study effects on rumen protozoa and the growth of lambs. Both experiments consisted of four treatments, two with a low-protein diet (120 g/kg) and two with a high-protein diet (160 g/kg). For both diets, one treatment was without (control) and one with the SSS (140 g/kg dietary DM). The lambs were fed ad libitum for 70 and 140 d in experiments 1 and 2, respectively. Thereafter, the digestibility of organic matter (OM), acid-detergent fibre and neutral-detergent fibre were determined for each diet with four lambs, and then all lambs were slaughtered and rumen fluid samples were collected and analysed. The results showed substantial decreases (P < 0.001) or total elimination of protozoa in the rumen fluid of the SSS-receiving lambs. In the first experiment the SSS also decreased (P < 0.05) feed intake, but an increase in average daily gain (P < 0.06) resulted in an improved (P < 0.05) feed:gain ratio. Also, the SSS increased (P < 0.05) the digestibility of fibre. In the second experiment the SSS decreased (P < 0.05) the OM digestibility, feed intake and growth of lambs. It was concluded that the use of sunflower-seed supplementation in high-concentrate diets of ruminants reduces rumen fauna, resulting in savings on dietary protein supplements and an increased digestion of feed.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".