In situ degradation of timothy conserved as restrictively or extensively fermented silage or as hay
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this study was to determine the effects of three modes of preserving timothy (Phleum pratense L.) on in situ degradation of dry matter (DM), organic matter, crude protein (CP), neutral detergent fiber and acid detergent fiber. First-cut timothy was conserved as hay, as restrictively fermented silage (formic acid 85% applied at 6 L t-1 of fresh crop), or as extensively fermented silage (inoculation with a mixture of Lactobacillus plantarum and Pediococcus cerevisiae yielding 1.25 × 1011 total CFU t-1). Six mid-lactating Holstein cows, previously adapted to the tested forage, were used to study the in situ degradation of each forage type (two cows per forage type). Triplicate bags were filled with 3.5 g DM equivalent of chopped wet forage and incubated in the rumen during 2, 4, 8, 12, 24, 48, or 72 h. Zero-hour bags were not inserted in the rumen. The conservation method affected in situ degradation of CP. Haying decreased (P ≤0.03) soluble protein (fraction a), degradation rate (c), lag time and effective degradability of CP in the rumen, and increased (P < 0.01) potentially degradable protein (fraction b) when compared with ensiling. Restricting fermentation in silage decreased (P < 0.01) fraction a and increased (P = 0.01) CP fraction b when compared with extensively fermented silage. Results indicate that conserving timothy as hay significantly decreases solubility, rate and extent of protein degradation in the rumen when compared with ensiling. Results also show that solubilization of protein in silage can be reduced by restricting fermentation with formic acid as compared with promoting fermentation with a bacterial inoculant, without a concurrent decrease in the extent of protein degradation in the rumen. Key words: In situ degradation, timothy, hay, restrictively fermented silage, extensively fermented silage, formic acid, inoculation
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".