Metabolic and endocrine responses to cold and feed restriction in ruminants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Twenty-four wether lambs were assigned to different temperature and feeding levels to assess their metabolic and endocrine profiles and to test the hypothesis that energy conservation responses of sheep to feed restriction occur in warm but not cold environments. Lambs were kept in warm (W; 23 ± 2 °C) or cold (C; 0 ± 2 °C) environments and received either an ad libitum (A) or a restricted (1.35 × maintenance) (R) level of feed intake, thus creating four treatment groups (WA, WR, CA and CR). Average daily gain (ADG), feed intake, metabolic rates, rectal temperature, and plasma levels of insulin, thyroxine (T4), triiodothyronine (T3) and cortisol were recorded during three periods of 5 wk each. The ADG was lower (P < 0.001) in feed-restricted groups. Cold exposure reduced the ADG along with feed efficiency in the first period (P < 0.01). Metabolic rate was lowered by feed restriction (P < 0.01) in periods 1 and 3, but was increased by cold exposure in ad libitum-fed sheep during period 1 (P < 0.05). Both cold exposure and feed restriction lowered rectal temperature (P < 0.001). Plasma insulin concentration was lowered by feed restriction (P < 0.05) and was increased (P < 0.05) by cold exposure during periods 2 and 3. Plasma T3 concentration was reduced (P < 0.05) by feed restriction and was increased by cold exposure during periods 1 and 2. Plasma T4 level remained unaltered (P > 0.05) while plasma cortisol concentration was increased by both cold exposure and feed restriction (P < 0.01). The results indicate that lambs show metabolic and physiological responses to feed restriction, which conserve energy in a cold as well as a warm environment. Key words: Sheep, hormone, cold-exposure, feed-restriction.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".