MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2221538239 · doi:10.1017/s1751731115001949

Prediction of enteric methane emissions from Holstein dairy cows fed various forage sources

2015· article· en· W2221538239 on OpenAlexafffund
D.E. Rico, P.Y. Chouinard, F. Hassanat, C. Benchaar, R. Gervais

Bibliographic record

Venueanimal · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaUniversité Laval
FundersAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaCanadian Dairy CommissionDairy Farmers of CanadaUniversité LavalAgilent Technologies
KeywordsSilageDry matterTotal mixed rationAnimal scienceLatin squareForageContext (archaeology)Neutral Detergent FiberDairy cattleRumenBiologyMathematicsFood scienceChemistryFermentationAgronomyLactationIce calving

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Milk fatty acid (FA) profile has been previously used as a predictor of enteric CH4 output in dairy cows fed diets supplemented with plant oils, which can potentially impact ruminal fermentation. The objective of this study was to investigate the relationships between milk FA and enteric CH4 emissions in lactating dairy cows fed different types of forages in the context of commonly fed diets. A total of 81 observations from three separate 3×3 Latin square design (32-day periods) experiments including a total of 27 lactating cows (96±27 days in milk; mean±SD) were used. Dietary forages were included at 60% of ration dry matter and were as follows: (1) 100% corn silage, (2) 100% alfalfa silage, (3) 100% barley silage, (4) 100% timothy silage, (5) 50:50 mix of corn and alfalfa silages, (6) 50:50 mix of barley and corn silages and (7) 50:50 mix of timothy and alfalfa silages. Enteric CH4 output was measured using respiration chambers during 3 consecutive days. Milk was sampled during the last 7 days of each period and analyzed for components and FA profile. Test variables included dry matter intake (DMI; kg/day), NDF (%), ether extract (%), milk yield (kg/day), milk components (%) and individual milk FA (% of total FA). Candidate multivariate models were obtained using the Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator and Least-Angle Regression methods based on the Schwarz Bayesian Criterion. Data were then fitted into a random regression using the MIXED procedure including the random effects of cow, period and study. A positive correlation was observed between CH4 and DMI (r=0.59, P0.19). Milk FA profile and DMI can be used to predict CH4 emissions in dairy cows across a wide range of dietary forage sources.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.917
Threshold uncertainty score0.222

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.193 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations40
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueanimalSame topicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive PhysiologyFrench-language works237,207