MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2554102278 · doi:10.2527/jam2016-1423

1423 Supplementing Corn on Alfalfa Pasture to Alter Growth Performance, Carcass, and Quality Traits

2016· article· en· W2554102278 on OpenAlexaffabout
Chloe Gresel, C. P. Campbell, Lisa M. Duizer, B.W. McBride, I. B. Mandell

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Animal Science · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicCrop Yield and Soil Fertility
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPalatabilityPastureBeef cattleForageBiologyMarbled meatAnimal scienceAgronomyMonogastricSilageFatty acidRuminantFodderFood scienceBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pasture finishing of beef cattle can be used to improve the fatty acid composition of beef (omega 3s and CLA) but at the possible expense of deleteriously affecting palatability traits. While pasture finished beef can command a premium in the marketplace, increased time on feed relative to finishing on a high grain diet can lead to production challenges due to much slower rates of gain for grass-fed beef. Supplementing corn on pasture may increase cattle gains and beef palatability attributes without necessarily deleteriously affecting beef fatty acid composition. The objective of this study was to examine how corn grain supplementation on alfalfa pasture alters carcass, meat quality, and fatty acid traits in an attempt to increase cattle performance and beef palatability. Fifty black Angus and Angus cross steers were randomly assigned to one of four management regimens: 1) 85.4% corn-based concentrate/14.6% forage diet fed in a drylot as a TMR (n = 12); 2) pastured cattle supplemented with corn at 1% BW (n = 13); 3) pastured cattle supplemented with corn at 0.5% BW (n = 12); 4) pastured cattle with no corn supplementation (n = 13). Pastured steers were rotationally grazed through 20 acres of predominantly alfalfa pasture while high concentrate-fed steers were housed in 2 drylot pens equipped with Calan gates to measure individual feed intakes. Cattle were fed for 111 d with BW taken every 14 d to track performance. Steers were harvested at a commercial packing plant where a rib section from each animal was shipped back to the University of Guelph Meat Lab for evaluation. Management regimen effects on performance, carcass, meat quality, trained taste panel and fatty acid data were evaluated using a Proc Mixed procedure in SAS. Average daily gain differed (P < 0.0001) across most management regimens. While grain feeding decreased (P < 0.01) dissectible lean, backfat and marbling were generally similar (P > 0.14) across management regimens. Grain feeding decreased (P < 0.0001) n-3 fatty acids without affecting (P > 0.27) CLA concentrations. Taste panel assessment of tenderness, juiciness, and beef flavor attributes were similar (P > 0.30) between beef from grain-fed cattle and beef from cattle that only consumed alfalfa pasture.

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)0.002
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.842
Threshold uncertainty score0.255

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Animal ScienceSame topicCrop Yield and Soil FertilityFrench-language works237,207