MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2152966153 · doi:10.1002/jsfa.2136

Assessment of nutritive value of cereal and legume straws based on chemical composition and <i>in vitro</i> digestibility

2005· article· en· W2152966153 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Science of Food and Agriculture · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersJunta de Castilla y León
KeywordsLegumeVicia sativaAvenaBiologySecaleAgronomySativumVicia villosaDry matterField peaVicia fabaLathyrusRumenLupinusPisumBotanyFood scienceFermentationCover crop

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The nutritive value of 17 straws was determined on the basis of their chemical composition, in vitro dry matter (DM) digestibility and rumen fermentation kinetics (from gas production curves measured in vitro ). Five roughages were from the cereal species Avena sativa (oat), Hordeum vulgare (barley), Secale cereale (rye), Triticum aestivum (wheat) and Zea mays (maize stover). The other 12 samples were legume straws, two samples from each of the species Cicer arietinum (chickpea), Lens culinaris (lentil) and Phaseolus vulgaris (bean) and one sample from each of the species Lathyrus sativus (chickling vetch), Lupinus albus (white lupin), Pisum sativum (field pea), Vicia articulata (one‐flowered vetch), Vicia ervilia (bitter vetch) and Vicia sativa (common vetch). All samples were collected after harvesting from different farms located in León (northwestern Spain). Based on their chemical composition, digestibility and gas production characteristics, species could be clustered into two groups with a significant linkage distance, one for cereal straws that merged at a level of similarity of 80% and the other for legume straws with a degree of similarity of 50%. Species varied widely and significant differences ( P &lt; 0.05) were observed between the two groups of straws. Legume straws showed higher crude protein (74 ± 6.1 vs 29 ± 2.2 g kg −1 DM) and lower fibre (584 ± 18.1 vs 793 ± 27.5 g neutral detergent fibre kg −1 DM) contents than cereal straws and, consequently, DM digestibility coefficients (0.670 vs 0.609; standard error of difference 0.0054) and metabolisable energy values (7.4 ± 0.15 vs 5.7 ± 0.24 MJ kg −1 DM) were significantly greater in legume than in cereal straws. Although there were noticeable differences among species within each botanical family, legume straws showed better nutritional quality than cereal straws, indicating that they could be considered promising and interesting sources of roughage for incorporation into ruminant diets. Copyright © 2005 Society of Chemical Industry

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.455
Threshold uncertainty score0.184

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.225 · 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