Seasonal-accumulated growth and forage quality of range grasses for fall and winter grazing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The production and subsequent feeding of forage during winter is a major expense for livestock producers. Fourteen perennial range forage grasses including crested wheatgrass (WG) [Agropyron cristatum and A. desertorum] , intermediate WG [Thinopyrum intermedium], tall WG [T. ponticum], quackgrass [Elytrigia repens] × bluebunch WG [Pseudoroegneria spicata] RS hybrids, Altai [Leymus angustus] wildrye (WR), basin [L. cinereus] WR, smooth bromegrass [Bromus inermis], and orchardgrass [Dactylis glomerata] were evaluated from 1992 to 1994 for total dry matter (DM) production (November harvest only), crude protein (CP), neutral (NDF), and acid (ADF) detergent fiber from November through March in northern Utah. Mean species DM production rankings (P < 0.01) combined across years were: RS hybrids > smooth bromegrass > basin WR > Altai WR > intermediate WG > orchardgrass > tall WG > crested WG. Mean species CP rankings (P < 0.01) combined across years and harvests were tall WG > intermediate WG > orchardgrass > RS hybrids > crested WG > Altai WR > basin WR > smooth bromegrass. Levels of CP remained constant from November through March for all species and entries. Trends in NDF and ADF remained constant from November through January, but NDF increased slightly in March. Crude protein of the dormant grasses was below the level necessary to maintain ruminal function so protein supplementation would be necessary. Key words: Range grasses, winter forage quality, yield, extending the grazing season
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".