MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2107033934 · doi:10.3168/jds.2008-1472

The effect of dietary fiber level on milk fat concentration and fatty acid profile of cows fed diets containing low levels of polyunsaturated fatty acids

2009· article· en· W2107033934 on OpenAlexafffund
Ousama AlZahal, M. M. Or-Rashid, S.L. Greenwood, Micheal Douglas, B.W. McBride

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Dairy Science · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSilageDry matterBranNeutral Detergent FiberPolyunsaturated fatty acidHayChemistryRumenFood scienceFatty acidAnimal scienceTotal mixed rationBiologyLactationBiochemistryFermentation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this study was to investigate the effect of dietary fiber level on milk fat concentration, yield, and fatty acid (FA) profile of cows fed diets low in polyunsaturated fatty acid (PUFA). Six rumen-fistulated Holstein dairy cows (639±51kg of body weight) were used in the study. Cows were randomly assigned to 1 of 2 dietary treatments, a high fiber (HF; % of dry matter, 40% corn silage, 27% alfalfa silage, 7% alfalfa hay, 18% protein supplement, 4% ground corn, and 4% wheat bran) or a low fiber (LF; % of dry matter, 31% corn silage, 20% alfalfa silage, 5% alfalfa hay, 15% protein supplement, 19% ground wheat, and 10% ground barley) total mixed ration. The diets contained similar levels of PUFA. The experiment was conducted over a period of 4 wk. Ruminal pH was continuously recorded and milk samples were collected 3 times a week. Milk yield and dry matter intake were recorded daily. The rumen fluid in cows receiving the LF diet was below pH 5.6 for a longer duration than in cows receiving the HF diet (357 vs. 103 min/d). Neither diet nor diet by week interaction had an effect on milk yield (kg/d), milk fat concentration and yield, or milk protein concentration and yield. During wk 4, milk fat concentration and milk fat yield were high and not different between treatments (4.30% and 1.36 kg/d for the HF treatment and 4.31% and 1.33 kg/d for the LF treatment, respectively). Cows receiving the LF diet had greater milk concentrations (g/100g of FA) of 7:0; 9:0; 10:0; 11:0; 12:0; 12:1; 13:0; 15:0; linoleic acid; FA iso 15:0; 18:0; trans -9 18:1; ci s-9, trans -11 conjugated linoleic acid (CLA); trans -9, cis -12 18:2; 20:0; and cis -9 20:1 compared with cows receiving the HF diet. Milk concentrations (g/100g of FA) of total trans 18:1; trans- 10 18:1; trans -11 18:1; trans- 10, cis- 12 CLA, and trans -9, cis -11 CLA were not different between treatments. The study demonstrated that cows fed a diet low in fiber and low in PUFA may exhibit subacute ruminal acidosis and moderate changes to milk fatty acid profile but without concomitant milk fat depression. The changes in FA profile may be useful for the diagnosis of SARA even in the absence of milk fat depression.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.236 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations55
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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