MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2194509681 · doi:10.5539/jas.v8n1p163

Methane Emission of Cattle Fed Urochloa brizantha Hay Harvested at Different Stages

2015· article· en· W2194509681 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Carolina Fernanda Moysés do Nascimento, A. Berndt, Laura Alexandra Romero Solórzano, Paula Marques Meyer, R. T. S. Frighetto, J. J. A. A. Demarchi, Paulo Henrique Mazza Rodrigues

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agricultural Science · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo
KeywordsHayForageRumenAnimal scienceDry matterLatin squareChemistryRuminantAgronomyFodderFermentationBiologyPastureFood science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this trial was to assess the methane emission rate, as well as the digestibility and ruminal fermentation parameters in animals fed Urochloa brizantha hay harvested at different stages of growth. Six Nellore rumen-cannulated steers (402.0 ± 51.62 kg) were assigned to a replicated 3×3 Latin square (18 experimental units). Treatments differed according to three growth stages of the forage: 15 - hay with 15 days of growth, 45 - hay with 45 days of growth and 90 - hay with 90 days of growth. Each experimental period lasted 21 days. From the 8th day, feces were sampled during 5 days to determine apparent total digestibility of dry matter and its fractions. Beginning on the 13th day and running for 7 days, methane production was evaluated using the sulfur hexafluoride (SF6) tracer technique. On the 20th day, ruminal fluid was sampled prior to and after 2, 4, 6, 8 and 10 hours post-morning feeding for evaluating pH, ammonia-N and short-chain fatty acids (SCFA). As the stage of forage growth for harvesting advanced in days, the digestibility coefficient of crude protein decreased and non-fibrous carbohydrate values increased. Methane production was affected not only by the stage of forage growth, but also by quality of its conservation after harvesting. There were significant differences among treatments when methane was expressed in g kg-1 DMI, g kg-1 OMI, % GE and % DE, with non-linear effect. The stage of forage growth did not influence ruminal pH, total concentration or molar proportion of SCFA, but decreased NH3-N concentration.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations10
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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