Effects of an exogenous enzyme-containing inoculant on fermentation characteristics of barley silage and on growth performance of feedlot steers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigated the effects of an inoculant on silage fermentation, aerobic stability, and the growing and finishing performance of feedlot steers. Whole-crop barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) was chopped, wilted [350–400 g kg −1 dry matter (DM)], and ensiled without (Control) or with (Treated) a bacterial inoculant containing a mixture of Pediococcus pentosaceus, Lactobacillus plantarum, and Propionibacterium freudenreicheii (1.3 × 105 CFU g −1 forage), as well as enzymes applied to fresh forage ensiled in mini or Ag-Bag ® silos. Inoculation resulted in a pH decline (P < 0.05) from 6.0 on the day of ensiling to <4.0 after 3 d. In contrast, it required more than 20 d for the pH of the Control silage to fall below 4.0. Inoculant reduced (P < 0.05) the concentration of acetic acid and aerobic stability of silage, as evidenced by a higher (P < 0.05) temperature and pH in aerobically exposed silage. Although the inoculant accelerated pH decline during ensiling, it did not improve the growth performance (P < 0.05) or alter the carcass traits of steers. It is possible that a reduction in the aerobic stability of the inoculated silage may have contributed to this outcome.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".