Influence of Sugar Cane Intake on Digestibility and Ruminal Fermentation in Crossbreed Steers Fed Stargrass
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Aranda, E., Mendoza, G.D., Bárcena, G.R., Ramos, J. and Castrejón, F. 2003. Influence of sugar cane intake on digestibility and ruminál fermentation in crossbreed steers fed stargrass. J. Appl. Anim. Res., 23: 153–160. An experiment was conducted to study effects of feeding different levels of sugar cane on ruminál fermentation and fiber digestion in crossbreed steers fed with stargrass mixtures when sugar cane (SC) and stargrass (SG) are fed together to four crossed (Bos taurus x Bos indicus) steers (455 kg BW) with ruminal canula. A Latin square design experiment was used to test different levels of chopped sugar cane intake (0, 0.9, 1.6 and 1.8% BW) with stargrass fed ad libitum. Intake of SG reduced linearly (P<0.05) as SC feed level increased. Ruminal digestibility of DM, NDF and ADF did not change (P>0.05), although CP was increased linearly. Total ADF digestibility increased with higher intake of SC. In situ NDF digestibilities of SG and SC were not affected (P>0.05) by treatments. Molar proportion of buty rate was increased (P<0.01) but other VFA did not change. Results indicated that sugar cane can be used as a complementory forage with stargrass, showing a substitutive effect without altering ruminal fermentation or digestibility of the diet.
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 | 0.001 | 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".