MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2290800548 · doi:10.1017/s1752756200008668

Screening of fibrolytic enzymes as additives for ruminant diets: relationship between enzyme activities and the <i>in vitro</i> degradation of enzyme-treated forages

2002· article· en· W2290800548 on OpenAlexaff
D. Colombatto, Diego Morgavi, André Freire Furtado, K. A. Beauchemin

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the British Society of Animal Science · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRuminantEnzymeSilageFermentationEnzyme assayFood scienceForageBiologyDegradation (telecommunications)In vitroBiochemistryChemistryAgronomyCrop

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Results in the literature concerning the efficacy of feed enzymes for ruminant diets have been mixed. Commercial preparations currently used are fermentation extracts containing several enzymic activities. It has been suggested that ruminal fermentation of grass and maize silages is enzyme-limited (Wallace et al., 2001). In order to design better enzyme additives, the enzyme activities likely to affect the animal responses should be identified. This study examined 23 commercial enzyme preparations for their biochemical properties and their ability to influence the in vitro degradation of alfalfa and maize silage.

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)0.001
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Citations8
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the British Society of Animal ScienceSame topicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive PhysiologyFrench-language works237,207