MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2079203455 · doi:10.3168/jds.2012-6109

Grain-based versus alfalfa-based subacute ruminal acidosis induction experiments: Similarities and differences between changes in milk fatty acids

2013· article· en· W2079203455 on OpenAlexaff
Ellen Colman, Ehsan Khafipour, B. Vlaeminck, Bernard De Baets, J.C. Plaizier, Veerle Fievez

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Dairy Science · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRumenAcidosisHayAnimal sciencePopulationChemistryFatty acidNeutral Detergent FiberAlfalfa hayBiologyFood scienceBiochemistryAgronomyDry matterEndocrinologyFermentationMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Subacute ruminal acidosis (SARA) is one of the most important metabolic disorders, traditionally characterized by low rumen pH, which might be induced by an increase in the dietary proportion of grains as well as by a reduction of structural fiber. Both approaches were used in earlier published experiments in which SARA was induced by replacing part of the ration by a grain mixture or alfalfa hay by alfalfa pellets. The main differences between both experiments were the presence of blood lipopolysaccharide and Escherichia coli and associated effects on the rumen microbial population in the rumen of grain-based induced SARA animals as well as a great amount of quickly fermentable carbohydrates in the grain-based SARA induction experiment. Both induction approaches changed rumen pH although the pH decrease was more substantial in the alfalfa-based SARA induction protocol. The goal of the current analysis was to assess whether both acidosis induction approaches provoked similar shifts in the milk fatty acid (FA) profile. Similar changes of the odd- and branched-chain FA and the C18 biohydrogenation intermediates were observed in the alfalfa-based SARA induction experiment and the grain-based SARA induction experiment, although they were more pronounced in the former. The proportion of trans-10 C18:1 in the last week of the alfalfa-based induction experiment was 6 times higher than the proportion measured during the control week. The main difference between both induction experiments under similar rumen pH changes was the decreasing sum of iso FA during the grain-based SARA induction experiment whereas the sum of iso FA remained stable during the alfalfa-based SARA induction experiment. The cellulolytic bacterial community seemed to be negatively affected by either the presence of E. coli and the associated lipopolysaccharide accumulation in the rumen or by the amount of starch and quickly fermentable carbohydrates in the diet. In general, changes in the milk FA profile were related to changes in rumen pH. Nevertheless, feed characteristics (low in structural fiber vs. high in starch) also affected the milk FA profile and, as such, both effects should be taken into account when subacute acidosis occurs.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.217 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations36
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Dairy ScienceSame topicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive PhysiologyFrench-language works237,207