Effect of method of conservation of timothy on endogenous nitrogen flows in lactating dairy cows
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The effect of the method of conservation of forage on endogenous N (EN) secretion was studied using a 15N isotope dilution technique in 4 lactating Holstein cows selected from a replicated 3x3 Latin square. Cows were equipped with ruminal, duodenal (n=4), and ileal (n=2) cannulas. Diets comprised 44% concentrate plus first-cut timothy conserved either as hay or as restrictively (formic) or extensively (inoc) fermented silage. Crude protein contents of hay, formic, and inoc averaged 10.4, 13.6, and 14.8%, respectively. Total EN flow and free EN at the duodenum were increased with hay compared with silages but were similar when expressed as proportion of duodenal N flow, with total EN flow averaging 25.8, 23.9, and 23.9% for hay, formic, and inoc, respectively, and free EN at the duodenum averaging 11.5, 9.8, and 9.7% for hay, formic, and inoc, respectively. Flow of bacterial N at the duodenum originating from an endogenous source tended to be higher with inoc compared with formic. Overall, the proportion of bacterial N derived from endogenous sources and urea was similar between treatments, averaging 23 and 15%, respectively. In the feces, flow of EN was similar across treatments and averaged 31% of total fecal N. More than 70% of fecal EN originated from undigested secretions into the forestomach. Absorption of N from the forestomach tended to increase for silages compared with hay. In conclusion, EN represented an important fraction of N flowing at the duodenum and in the feces. The free EN and the total EN at the duodenum were altered by the different methods of forage conservation studied. Estimation of true dietary N supply and requirements of the dairy cow should allow for endogenous N flows and losses.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".