Rumen fermentation and microbial population in lactating dairy cows receiving diets containing oilseeds rich in C-18 fatty acids
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sixteen Holstein rumen-cannulated primiparous milking dairy cows were fed a control diet (CN) based on maize silage and soyabean meal during a 4-week period before the start of a 21-d experiment with oilseeds containing high concentration of linoleic acid (Linola™) or linolenic acid (NuLin™). Thereafter, four cows received ad libitum one of each of four dietary treatments comprising of CN, Linola (LN), NuLin (NL) and LN/NL (50/50 % combination). Each LN, NL and LN/NL treatment contained 6 % oil of DM. Rumen digesta samples were collected on days 6, 11, 16 and 21 and milk samples on days 13, 15 and 17. There were no effects (P>0.05) of the oilseeds on pH and concentrations of NH3-N and total volatile fatty acids, while the acetate:propionate ratio was decreased (P< 0.05). The oilseeds also decreased (P< 0.05) protozoa and increased (P< 0.1) total cellulolytic bacteria in rumen fluid, especially when containing high dietary linoleic acid (P< 0.05). The milk protein concentration was increased (P< 0.1) by the dietary linoleic acid, which produced most beneficial results. It was concluded that supplements of linoleic acid in diets of ruminants might contribute to better digestion of dietary fibre and increased quality of milk.
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".