Effects of feeding time on thermoregulation of beef heifers in winter
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The effects of morning (0900) vs. evening (2000) and natural (< 15 h natural light d-1) vs. extended (65 lux for 16 to 19 h d-1) photoperiod on vaginal temperature, growth rate and feed efficiency were examined in 48 crossbred beef heifers during the backgrounding and finishing periods. The backgrounding and finishing periods were each subdivided into two 28- intervals to relate ambient and vaginal temperature variables to feedlot performance variables. Time of feeding influenced performance and vaginal temperature patterns during the backgrounding period. Although evening-fed heifers spent more hours at vaginal temperatures exceeding daily mean vaginal temperature during the coldest part of the day (feeding time; P ≤ 0.03), morning-fed heifers grew faster and more efficiently than evening-fed heifers during the coldest interval of the backgrounding period (feeding time interval; P ≤ 0.01). Heifers exposed to an extended photoperiod had higher vaginal temperature, particularly in the late morning (0800 to 1100) than heifers receiving natural photoperiod during the finishing period. Results of this study indicated that the benefit of evening feeding on animal performance was more pronounced in cool than in cold weather. Key words: Beef cattle, thermoregulation, evening feeding
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".