Effects of Barley Grain Processing on Extent of Digestion and Milk Production of Lactating Cows
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Effects of barley processing on site and extent of digestion and milk production in dairy cows were evaluated in a 4 x 4 Latin square design with four lactating cows with ruminal and duodenal cannulas. Barley grain was steam-rolled to four thicknesses: coarse, medium, medium-flat, and flat. The processing index (PI), measured as volume weight of barley after processing expressed as a percentage of its volume weight before processing, was 81.0, 72.5, 64.0, and 55.5% for the four treatments, respectively. Diets consisted of 53% concentrate (dry matter basis) containing one of the four processed barleys. Cows were offered ad libitum access to a total mixed ration three times daily. Dry matter intake was quadratically increased with decreasing PI, with maximum intake for cows fed medium-flat barley. Although ruminal digestibilities of organic matter, starch, and crude protein were not affected by grain processing, intestinal and total tract digestibilities were linearly increased as PI of barley was reduced. Milk yield was quadratically increased (25.6, 28.1, 30.8, and 29.0 kg/d) with decreasing PI, and maximum milk yield was for cows fed medium-flat barley. Milk fat and lactose contents were similar, but milk protein content was increased with decreasing PI. These results indicate that the optimal extent of barley processing for dairy cows fed diets supplying adequate fiber was medium-flat, corresponding to a processing index of about 64%. Coarsely or flatly rolled barley is not recommended, because extensive processing did not further improve intake of digestible nutrients, and coarsely processed barley resulted in the lowest intake of digestible organic matter; hence, lowest milk production. Processing index is a reliable and practical method to quantitatively measure extent of steam rolling.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".