MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Effects of Essential Oils on Digestion, Ruminal Fermentation, Rumen Microbial Populations, Milk Production, and Milk Composition in Dairy Cows Fed Alfalfa Silage or Corn Silage

2007· article· en· W2161555604 on OpenAlexafffund
C. Benchaar, H.V. Petit, R. Berthiaume, D.R. Ouellet, J. Chiquette, P.Y. Chouinard

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Dairy Science · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
FundersAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
KeywordsSilageRumenLatin squareDry matterLactoseNeutral Detergent FiberFood scienceFermentationPropionateDigestion (alchemy)Composition (language)ChemistryForageTotal mixed rationDairy cattleAnimal scienceBiologyAgronomyLactationBiochemistryIce calvingChromatography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Four Holstein cows fitted with ruminal cannulas were used in a 4 x 4 Latin square design (28-d periods) with a 2 x 2 factorial arrangement of treatments to investigate the effects of addition of a specific mixture of essential oil compounds (MEO; 0 vs. 750 mg/d) and silage source [alfalfa silage (AS) vs. corn silage (CS)] on digestion, ruminal fermentation, rumen microbial populations, milk production, and milk composition. Total mixed rations containing either AS or CS as the sole forage source were balanced to be isocaloric and isonitrogenous. In general, no interactions between MEO addition and silage source were observed. Except for ruminal pH and milk lactose content, which were increased by MEO supplementation, no changes attributable to the administration of MEO were observed for feed intake, nutrient digestibility, end-products of ruminal fermentation, microbial counts, and milk performance. Dry matter intake and milk production were not affected by replacing AS with CS in the diet. However, cows fed CS-based diets produced milk with lower fat and higher protein and urea N concentrations than cows fed AS-based diets. Replacing AS with CS increased the concentration of NH(3)-N and reduced the acetate-to-propionate ratio in ruminal fluid. Total viable bacteria, cellulolytic bacteria, and protozoa were not influenced by MEO supplementation, but the total viable bacteria count was higher with CS- than with AS-based diets. The apparent digestibility of crude protein did not differ between the AS and CS treatments, but digestibilities of neutral detergent fiber and acid detergent fiber were lower when cows were fed CS-based diets than when they were fed AS-based diets. Duodenal bacterial N flow, estimated using urinary purine derivatives and the amount of N retained, increased in cows fed CS-based diets compared with those fed AS-based diets. Feeding cows AS increased the milk fat contents of cis-9, trans-11 18:2 (conjugated linoleic acid) and 18:3 (n-3 fatty acid) compared with feeding cows CS. Results from this study showed limited effects of MEO supplementation on nutrient utilization, ruminal fermentation, and milk performance when cows were fed diets containing either AS or CS as the sole forage source.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations347
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Dairy ScienceSame topicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive PhysiologyFrench-language works237,207