Increased feeding frequency increased milk fat yield and may reduce the severity of subacute ruminal acidosis in higher-risk cows
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objectives of this study were to determine whether feeding behavior is different between cows at higher or lower risk for subacute ruminal acidosis (SARA) and whether increasing feeding frequency could be used to reduce the severity of SARA in higher-risk cows. In preliminary studies, 16 ruminally cannulated lactating cows were fed high-grain diets once per day to increase the risk of SARA. After a 17-d diet adaptation, ruminal pH was measured every 30 s over 24 h. Cows were classified as higher-risk (n = 7) or lower-risk (n = 9) for SARA based on an acidosis index (area of pH <5.8/dry matter intake). Feeding behavior was recorded every 5 min over the same 24 h. The 24-h observation period was analyzed in 3 periods of 8 h after feeding. Although there was no significant difference in overall dry matter intake, higher-risk cows spent more time eating in the first 8-h period after feeding than lower-risk cows (186 vs. 153 min) and less time eating in the third 8-h period (19 vs. 43 min). In the primary experiment, 8 ruminally cannulated lactating cows were fed a high-grain diet once per day (1×; 0800 h) or 3 times per day (3×; 0800, 1500, and 2000 h) in a crossover design with 21-d periods (16 d of treatment adaptation and 5 d of data collection). Rumen pH and feeding behavior were measured over 72 h. Behavior data were summarized separately for the 3 periods (0800 to 1500, 1500 to 2200, and 2200 to 0800 h). Four cows were categorized as higher-risk and 4 as lower-risk, based on their acidosis index. The 3× feeding reduced eating time between 0800 and 1500 h (99 vs. 145 min) and increased eating time between 2200 and 0800 h (76 vs. 43 min) for all cows, regardless of category, compared with 1× feeding. For higher-risk cows, 3× feeding reduced the area below pH 5.8 (51 vs. 98 pH × min/d), but it did not affect rumen pH for the lower-risk cows. Milk yield was not different between groups, but 3× feeding increased milk fat yield (1.22 vs. 1.08 kg/d) for all cows, regardless of category, compared to 1× feeding. Our results suggest that cows at higher risk for SARA eat less evenly throughout the day; increasing feeding frequency may reduce the severity of SARA in higher-risk cows and may also increase milk fat yield.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".