1636 Effects of inoculum source and ammoniation on in vitro gas production kinetics of barley straw
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A batch culture was conducted to assess the effects of inoculum source and ammoniation on in vitro gas production (GP) and DM digestion (DMD) kinetics of barley straw (BS). The experiment was a 2 × 2 × 2 factorial with low- vs. high-fiber digesting rumen inoculum; ammoniated vs. untreated BS; and with and without the replacement of forage with concentrate. All substrates were ground through a 2-mm screen. Inoculum was collected from two low- and two high-fiber digesting beef heifers as defined by the rate of digestion (0.021 to 0.026/h) and effective degradability (ED) of DM of BS. For the concentrate treatment (BSC), 30% BS was replaced by an equal amount of concentrate. Additional vials containing only concentrate were used to correct for its contribution to GP. The GP was recorded at 3, 6, 9, 12, 24, 36, 48, and 72 h and DMD was measured after 6, 12, 24, 48, and 72 h. The experiment was repeated three times on different days. Data were fitted to exponential models: GP = b(1−e−c(t-L)) and DMD = a+b(1−e−c (t−L)). The GP parameters were not affected by inoculum source, but lag time decreased (P < 0.01) with ammoniation (0.6 h) vs. untreated (1.5 h) or with BSC (0.7 h) vs. BS (1.4 h). Initial GP (ml/g OM) increased (P < 0.01) with ammoniation (8.1) vs. untreated (7.1) or with BSC (8.2) vs. BS (7.0). For DMD, the high- vs. low-fiber digesting inoculum decreased (P < 0.01) the soluble fraction, lag time and ED of DM without affecting the potentially digestible fraction or rate of disappearance of the potentially digestible fraction. Ammoniation improved (P < 0.01) DMD kinetics (soluble, 11 vs. 15%; potentially digestible, 50 vs. 59%; rate, 5.4 vs. 6.2%/h; lag time, 2.8 vs. 2.0 h) and ED (30 vs. 36%) of BS. The BSC compared with BS had greater (P < 0.01) ED (36 vs. 31%) without altering other DMD parameters. Although both inoculum source (soluble, P < 0.05; lag time, P < 0.01; and ED, P < 0.10) and BSC (potential digestible fraction, lag time, and ED; P < 0.01) exhibited an interaction with ammoniation, kinetic parameters tended to be improved by ammoniation. These results suggest that inoculum from high-fiber digesting cattle did not improve in vitro GP or DMD of BS. In addition, the study confirmed that ammoniation improved the ruminal digestion of BS.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".