Effects of Flaxseed on Protein Requirements and N Excretion of Dairy Cows Fed Diets with Two Protein Concentrations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Thirty-eight midlactating Holstein cows averaging 597 kg of body weight (SD = 59) were used to determine the effects of dietary flaxseed on protein requirement and N excretion in urine and feces. Milk yield and composition, intake, and digestibility were also determined. Cows were allotted from wk 20 to 30 of lactation to 1 of 4 TMR containing 1) no flaxseed (control) and 16% protein (MPC), 2) whole flaxseed and 16% protein (MPF), 3) no flaxseed (control) and 18% protein (HPC), and 4) whole flaxseed and 18% protein (HPF). Cows fed high protein diets had greater feed intake than those fed medium protein diets (20.2 vs. 18.4 kg/d), and cows fed no flaxseed had greater dry matter intake than those fed flaxseed (20.1 vs. 18.5 kg/d). Milk yield was lower for cows fed MPF (20.3 kg/d) than for those fed HPC (24.4 kg/d), HPF (24.9 kg/d), or MPC (24.0 kg/d). Milk protein and lactose concentrations were similar for cows fed MPC and HPC, but flaxseed decreased milk protein concentration in cows fed MPF or HPF compared with cows fed the control diets. Milk fat concentration was similar in cows fed diets with or without flaxseed, but it was decreased by higher protein concentration. Digestibility was generally reduced when diets contained flaxseed and lower protein concentration. Dietary protein had no effect while dietary flaxseed increased fecal N excretion. Retention of N was lower in cows fed flaxseed compared with cows fed the control diets. Feeding flaxseed decreased milk concentrations of short- and medium-chain fatty acids and increased those of long-chain fatty acids. Flaxseed had no effect on the dietary requirement of N by midlactating dairy cows.
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".