Behavior and inflammation of the rumen and cecum in Holstein bulls fed high-concentrate diets with different concentrate presentation forms with or without straw supplementation1
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Twenty-four individually housed Holstein bulls (395 ± 7.3 kg BW and 252 ± 3.1 d age) were exposed to a 2 × 2 factorial design (meal vs. pellets; with vs. without straw) to evaluate the effect of concentrate form and provision of straw in finishing diets on behavior and expression of rumen and cecum epithelium genes related to inflammation and behavior. Concentrate and straw consumption were recorded monthly and behavior (self-grooming, social, oral nonnutritive, tongue rolling, eating, drinking, ruminating, and lying) was recorded every two weeks. Bulls were slaughtered after 64 d of exposure to treatments, lesions on the rumen and liver were assessed, and samples of the rumen and cecum were collected. Straw supplementation tended ( = 0.08) to increase concentrate intake (8.0 vs. 7.4 ± 0.26 kg/d), increased ( < 0.01) the proportion of time ruminating (9.4 vs. 3.1 ± 1.02%), and decreased ( < 0.01) the occurrence of oral nonnutritive behaviors (0.52 vs. 1.34 ± 0.123 times/15 min) relative to bulls deprived of straw. Provision of straw increased ruminal pH, but the magnitude of the change was greater when the concentrate was provided as meal compared with pellets (interaction, < 0.05). When straw was not supplemented, all rumen samples had papillae fusion, whereas only 16.7% of bulls fed pellets and straw had papillae fusions (interaction, < 0.05). Vacuole grading of the rumen papillae was less ( < 0.01) in bulls provided straw compared with bulls without straw. For the ruminal epithelium, straw provision tended to increase the relative expression ratio of (which stimulates peptide YY, PYY, and serotonin secretion; = 0.06) and α (which modulates immune reactions and behavior; = 0.09) and increased and (tight junction proteins; < 0.05), along with β and (proinflammatory cytokines; < 0.01) and ( < 0.01) in the rumen. Moreover, it also tended to increase the relative gene expression ratio of β (an antimicrobial peptide; = 0.10) and ( = 0.10). Bulls fed pellets had a decreased ruminal relative expression ratio of α ( < 0.05). Bulls without straw had increased ( < 0.05) the cecum relative expression ratio of β. In conclusion, the lack of straw supplementation in bulls fed high-concentrate diets modifies behavior and affects rumen macroscopic morphology and expression of epithelial genes that could be related to behavior and inflammation.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".