Ensiling characteristics, ruminal nutrient degradabilities and whole tract nutrient utilization of berseem clover (<i>Trifolium alexandrinum</i> L.) silage
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A study was conducted to determine ensiling characteristics and nutrient utilization by ruminants of berseem clover silage (BCS). Ensiling characteristics were determined by ensiling forage in mini-silos for 0, 2, 4, 8, 16 and 70 d. Two lactating Holstein cows fitted with ruminal cannulas were utilized to determine ruminal nutrient degradabilities while six ram lambs were used to determine total tract nutrient digestibilities. Ruminal and whole tract nutrient utilization of BCS were compared with those of alfalfa silage (AS). Results showed that BCS went through a rapid fermentation as shown by a significant (P < 0.05) reduction in pH during the first 2 d post-ensiling. Most of the proteolytic activity took place between day 0 and day 2 as indicated by a reduction (P < 0.05) in true protein and neutral detergent insoluble protein and an increase (P < 0.05) in non-protein nitrogen. Relative to AS, BCS had a similar ruminal degradability of dry matter (DM), a lower degradability of crude protein (CP), and a higher (P < 0.05) degradability of neutral detergent fiber (NDF). Relative to AS, BCS had a higher (P < 0.05) whole-tract digestibility of DM (70.7 vs. 66.0%), organic matter (71.5 vs. 65.9%), NDF (65.6 vs. 54.5), acid detergent fiber (64.6 vs. 54.6) and gross energy (69.6 vs. 64.0), but a lower (P < 0.05) wholetract digestibility of CP (69.2 vs. 75.9%). These results suggest that BSC could replace AS as a forage source for ruminants. Key words: Berseem clover silage, ruminal degradability, total tract nutrient utilization
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) | 0.000 | 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 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".