Effect of Propionibacterium freudenreichii in diets containing rapeseed or flaxseed oil on in vitro ruminal fermentation, methane production and fatty acid biohydrogenation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objectives of the present study were to determine the effect of inoculating Propionibacterium freudenreichii subsp. shermanii ATCC 8262 (1 × 109 colony-forming units per vial) in a barley silage-based diet supplemented with flaxseed oil or rapeseed oil (60 g/kg DM), on in vitro proportions and yield of volatile fatty acids, methane production and fatty acid (FA) biohydrogenation. Total volatile fatty acid production (mM) and proportions of individual FAs were not affected (P = 0.10) by P. freudenreichii. Similarly, propionibacteria had little impact on FA biohydrogenation, resulting only in an increased accumulation (P < 0.01) of C18:1 cis-15 (g/kg total FA) at 6 h of incubation, compared with the control (CON). Compared with the CON, an increased (P < 0.01) accumulation of vaccenic acid was observed at 48 h in all oil-containing treatments, regardless of the oil type. Similarly, the apparent biohydrogenation of flaxseed oil resulted in an increased (P = 0.04) accumulation of conjugated linoleic acid cis-9, trans-11, compared with all other treatments. Additionally, flaxseed oil produced a greater (P = 0.01) accumulation of beneficial biohydrogenation intermediates (C18:2 trans-11, cis-15; C18:1 cis-15 and vaccenic acid), reflecting its ability to produce a more desirable FA profile than that of rapeseed oil or CON. The inability of P. freudenreichii subsp. shermanii ATCC 8262 to alter ruminal fermentation in a manner that lowered methane production, along with only minor effects on FA profiles through biohydrogenation, suggests that the biological activity of this strain was not realised under in vitro batch-culture conditions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".