MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2562187827 · doi:10.3168/jds.2016-11592

Growth performance, feeding behavior, and selected blood metabolites of Holstein dairy calves fed restricted amounts of milk: No interactions between sources of finely ground grain and forage provision

2016· article· en· W2562187827 on OpenAlexaff
M. Mirzaei, M. Khorvash, G.R. Ghorbani, M. Kazemi‐Bonchenari, Morteza Hosseini Ghaffari

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Dairy Science · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersIsfahan University of Technology
KeywordsForageSilageHayStarterBiologyAnimal scienceAlfalfa hayAnimal feedFeed conversion ratioBody weightAgronomyRumenFood scienceFermentationEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this study was to investigate the effects of grain sources and forage provision on growth performance, blood metabolites, and feeding behaviors of dairy calves. Sixty 3-d-old Holstein dairy calves (42.2 ± 2.5 kg of body weight) were used in a 2 × 3 factorial arrangement with the factors being grain sources (barley and corn) and forage provision (no forage, alfalfa hay, and corn silage). Individually housed calves were randomly assigned (n = 10 calves per treatment: 5 males and 5 females) to 6 treatments: (1) barley grain (BG) without forage supplement, (2) BG with alfalfa hay (AH) supplementation, (3) BG with corn silage (CS) supplementation, (4) corn grain (CG) without forage supplement, (5) CG with AH supplementation, and (6) CG with CS supplementation. All calves had ad libitum access to water and starter feed throughout the experiment. All calves were weaned on d 49 and remained in the study until d 63. Starter feed intake and average daily gain (ADG) was greater for calves fed barley than those fed corn during the preweaning and overall periods. Calves supplemented with CS had greater final body weight and postweaning as well as overall starter feed intake than AH and non-forage-supplemented calves. During the preweaning and overall periods, feeding of CS was found to increase ADG compared with feeding AH and nonforage diets. However, feed efficiency was not affected by dietary treatments. Calves supplemented with CS spent more time ruminating compared with AH and control groups; nonnutritive oral behaviors were the greatest in non-forage-supplemented calves. Regardless of the grain sources, the rumen pH value was greater for AH calves compared with CS and non-forage-supplemented calves. Blood concentration of BHB was greater for CS-supplemented calves compared with AH and non-forage-supplemented calves. Furthermore, body length and heart girth were greater for calves fed barley compared with those fed corn, and also in forage-supplemented calves compared with non-forage-supplemented calves. These results showed no interactions between grain sources and forage provision on calf performance; however, the inclusion of CS and barley in starter diets could enhance the growth performance of Holstein calves during the transition from liquid to solid feed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.228 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations69
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Dairy ScienceSame topicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive PhysiologyFrench-language works237,207