MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Effects of Addition of Essential Oils and Monensin Premix on Digestion, Ruminal Fermentation, Milk Production, and Milk Composition in Dairy Cows

2006· article· en· W2115015884 on OpenAlexafffund
C. Benchaar, H.V. Petit, R. Berthiaume, Tamieka Whyte, P.Y. Chouinard

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Dairy Science · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalNova Scotia Department of AgricultureAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
FundersAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaDairy Farmers of Nova Scotia
KeywordsDry matterMonensinChemistryNeutral Detergent FiberFood scienceDigestion (alchemy)Composition (language)Latin squareRumenFermentationFatty acidConjugated linoleic acidAnimal scienceLinoleic acidBiologyBiochemistryChromatography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Four ruminally cannulated, lactating Holstein cows were used in a 4 x 4 Latin square design (28-d periods) with a 2 x 2 factorial arrangement of treatments to study the effects of dietary addition of essential oils (0 vs. 2 g/d; EO) and monensin (0 vs. 350 mg/d; MO) on digestion, ruminal fermentation characteristics, milk production, and milk composition. Intake of dry matter averaged 22.7 kg/d and was not significantly affected by dietary additives. Apparent digestibilities of dry matter, organic matter, neutral detergent fiber, and starch were similar among treatments. Apparent digestibility of acid detergent fiber was increased when diets were supplemented with EO (48.9 vs. 46.0%). Apparent digestibility of crude protein was higher for cows fed MO compared with those fed no MO (65.0 vs. 63.6%). Nitrogen retention was not changed by additive treatments and averaged 27.1 g/d across treatments. Ruminal pH was increased with the addition of EO (6.50 vs. 6.39). Ruminal ammonia nitrogen (NH3-N) concentration was lower with MO-supplemented diets compared with diets without MO (12.7 vs. 14.3 mg/100 mL). No effect of EO and MO was observed on total volatile fatty acid concentrations and molar proportions of individual volatile fatty acids. Protozoa counts were not affected by EO and MO addition. Production of milk and 4% fat-corrected milk was similar among treatments (33.6 and 33.4 kg/d, respectively). Milk fat content was lower for cows fed MO than for cows fed diets without MO (3.8 vs. 4.1%). The reduced milk fat concentration in cows fed MO was associated with a higher level of trans-10 18:1, a potent inhibitor of milk fat synthesis. Milk urea nitrogen concentration was increased by MO supplementation, but this effect was not apparent when MO was fed in combination with EO (interaction EO x MO). Results from this study suggest that feeding EO (2 g/d) and MO (350 mg/d) to lactating dairy cows had limited effects on digestion, ruminal fermentation characteristics, milk production, and milk composition.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Citations272
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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