MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2077379871 · doi:10.4141/a00-119

Evaluation of dietary strategies to reduce methane production in ruminants: A modelling approach

2001· article· en· W2077379871 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Animal Science · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
Canadian institutionsNova Scotia Department of AgricultureAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsForageRumenMethanogenesisLegumeHayDry matterAgronomyMethaneDigestion (alchemy)StrawStarchFodderBiologyAnimal scienceRuminantFood scienceChemistryFermentationEcologyCrop

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this study was to use the modelling approach to assess the effectiveness of different existing nutritional strategies to reduce methane production from ruminants. For this purpose, a modified version of a mechanistic and dynamic model of rumen digestion was used. Simulated strategies included: dry matter intake (DMI), forage to concentrate ratio, nature of concentrate (fibrous vs. starchy concentrate), type of starch (slowly vs. rapidly degraded), forage species (legume vs. grass), forage maturity, forage preservation method (dried vs. ensiled), forage processing, and upgrading and supplementation of poor quality forages (straw). This study showed that mathematical modelling is a valuable tool to evaluate the impact of a given dietary manipulation not only on methanogenesis but also on the metabolism of the whole rumen system. Depending on the nature of the intervention, methane production can be reduced by 10 to 40%. Increasing DMI and the proportion of concentrate in the diet reduced methane production (–7 and –40%). Methane production was also decreased with the replacement of fibrous concentrate with starchy concentrate (–22%) and with the utilization of less ruminally degradable starch (–17%). The use of more digestible forage (less mature and processed forage) resulted in a reduction of methane production (–15 and –21%). Methane production was lower with legume than with grass forage (–28%), and with silage compared to hay (–20%). Supplementation or ammoniation of straw did not reduce methane losses, but had a positive impact on the efficiency of rumen metabolism. The modelling approach demonstrated that reduction of methane production from ruminants is a complex challenge. Implementation of any strategy must take into account the possible consequences on the efficiency of the entire rumen system. Key words: Ruminants, methane reduction, modelling approach

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.956
Threshold uncertainty score0.668

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.127
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.178 · 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