MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2154688819 · doi:10.5539/jfr.v3n6p124

Effect of Fermented Winery By-Product Supplemented Rations on the Temperament and Meat Quality of Angus-Hereford X Steers During Feeding in a British Columbia Feedlot

2014· article· en· W2154688819 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Paul E. Moote, John S. Church, K. S. Schwartzkopf-Genswein, Jonathan D. Van Hamme

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Food Research · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMeat and Animal Product Quality
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaThompson Rivers University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFeedlotAnimal scienceBeef cattleWineryFood scienceTendernessBiologyChemistryWine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Novel value-added beef products provide improved product differentiation within the beef marketplace. This study evaluated the impacts of supplementing feeds with fermented winery by-products (WB) to produce the novel beef product labeled by industry as “wine-finished beef”. To evaluate the impact of this feed, a total of 69 Angus-Hereford X steers were placed in four pens (n=18,17,17,17), one replicate pen per treatment, and fed finishing rations containing equal amounts of either 6-7% WB or 6-7% water (Control; C) over a 143 day feeding period. Dietary treatments were not significantly different with respect to energy or chemical contents (P > 0.05). Interestingly, the average daily gains (ADG; kg*d-1) of cattle did not differ between diets (P > 0.05); however, the ADG of all beef cattle changed over the feeding period (P < 0.0041). Cattle temperament, evaluated by measuring their flight speed, changed over time (P = 0.0097), but not between diets (P = 0.6938). Meat quality attributes including chemical, colour, and tenderness properties did not differ (P > 0.05) between diets with the exception of ground steak, which was darker (P = 0.0477) in cattle fed WB compared to C supplemented feeds, respectively. Supplementing cattle feeds with WB provides a new marketing stream for beef products with no observed differences to cattle behaviour, animal gains or meat tenderness.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.794
Threshold uncertainty score0.409

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.266 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations6
Published2014
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Food ResearchSame topicMeat and Animal Product QualityFrench-language works237,207