Ruminal degradation and intestinal digestibility of protein and amino acids in high-protein feedstuffs commonly used in dairy diets
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A study was conducted to determine the rumen degradation and intestinal digestibility of crude protein (CP) and AA, and AA composition of the rumen-undegradable protein (RUP) from 3 sources of blood meal (BM1, BM2, and BM3), canola meal (CM), low-fat distillers dried grains with solubles (LFDG), soybean meal (SBM), and expeller soybean meal (ESBM). Two Holstein cows fitted with ruminal and proximal duodenal cannulas were used for in situ incubation of 16h and for the mobile bag technique. To correct for bacterial contamination of the RUP, 2 methods were used: purines and DNA as bacterial markers. Ruminal degradations of CP were 85.3, 29.8, 40.7, 75.7, 76.9, 68.8, and 37.0 ± 3.93% for BM1, BM2, BM3, CM, LFDG, SBM, and ESBM, respectively. Ruminal degradation of both total essential AA and nonessential AA followed a similar pattern to that of CP across feedstuffs. Based on the ratio of AA concentration in the RUP to AA concentration in the original feedstuff, ruminal incubation decreased (ratio <1) the concentrations of His, Lys, and Trp, and increased (ratio >1) the concentrations of Ile and Met across feedstuffs. Compared with purines, the use of DNA as bacterial marker resulted in a higher estimate of bacterial CP contamination for CM and lower estimates for LFDG and ESBM. Intestinal digestibility of RUP could not be estimated for BM1, BM3, and SBM due to insufficient recovery of residue. For the remaining feedstuffs, intestinal digestibility of RUP was highest for ESBM, followed by BM2 and LFDG, and lowest for CM: 98.8, 87.9, 89.7, and 72.4 ± 1.40%, respectively. Intestinal absorbable dietary protein was higher for BM2 compared with CM and LFDG, at 61.7, 17.9, and 20.7 ± 2.73% CP, respectively. As prices fluctuate, intestinal absorbable protein or AA may be used as a tool to aid in the selection among feedstuffs with different protein quality.
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 | 0.001 | 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 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".