MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2178800765 · doi:10.1139/cjas-2015-055

Evaluation of canola meal derived from Brassica juncea and Brassica napus seed as an energy source for feedlot steers

2015· article· en· W2178800765 on OpenAlexaffabout
NairJayakrishnan, B PennerGregory, YuPeiqiang, A. LardnerH., McAllisterTim, Daalkhaijav Damiran, J McKinnonJohn

Bibliographic record

VenueBioOne Complete (BioOne) · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Nutrition and Physiology
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCanolaBrassicaSilageFeedlotMealAgronomyRapeseedHayBeef cattleBiologyAnimal scienceSoybean mealFood science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nair, J., Penner, G. B., Yu, P., Lardner, H. A., McAllister, T., Damiran, D. and McKinnon, J. J. 2015. Evaluation of canola meal derived from Brassica juncea and Brassica napus seed as an energy source for feedlot steers. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 95: 599-607. This study evaluated the substitution of barley grain with two sources of canola meal (CM) derived from Brassica napus and B. juncea on performance of feedlot cattle. Crossbred steers [n=300; initial body weight (BW)=311±23 kg] were allotted to 25 pens with each pen randomly assigned to one of five treatments. The control backgrounding diet consisted of 39% barley silage, 30.4% barley grain, 22.8% brome hay and 7.8% supplement, while the control finishing diet consisted of 88.3% barley grain, 4.4% barley silage and 7.3% supplement (dry matter basis). The control diets contained no CM during backgrounding and finishing. Treatment diets included 15 and 30% B. napus or B. juncea meal during backgrounding and 10 and 20% during finishing, with canola meal replacing barley grain in both phases. In each phase the data were analyzed as a 2×2 factorial plus a control. Cattle fed CM substituted diets during backgrounding had greater (P<0.05) dry matter intake (DMI), average daily gain (ADG) and final BW relative to those fed the control diet. Gain to feed ratio (G:F) and calculated net energy for maintenance (NEm) and gain (NEg) were not affected (P>0.05) by treatment. During finishing, DMI and ADG did not differ (P>0.05) across treatments. Feed efficiency, NEm and NEg decreased (P<0.05) at the 20% CM level relative to 10%. Over the entire feeding period, G:F, NEm and NEg were reduced (P<0.05) with higher inclusion of CM in the diet. The percentage of cattle grading Canada AAA was reduced (P<0.05) by CM. These results indicate that regardless of type CM has a lower net energy value than barley grain and that it is not an equivalent energy substitute for cereal grains over the entire feeding period.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.415
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.143 · 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

Citations9
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBioOne Complete (BioOne)Same topicAnimal Nutrition and PhysiologyFrench-language works237,207