MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2582601224 · doi:10.3389/fmicb.2016.02128

Nutritional Models of Experimentally-Induced Subacute Ruminal Acidosis (SARA) Differ in Their Impact on Rumen and Hindgut Bacterial Communities in Dairy Cows

2017· article· en· W2582601224 on OpenAlexafffund
Jan C. Plaizier, Shucong Li, Hein M. Tun, Ehsan Khafipour

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Microbiology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaDairy Farmers of Manitoba
KeywordsRumenBiologyLatin squareAnimal scienceFecesDry matterAcidosisCecumBacteroidetesTotal mixed rationValerateAbomasumRuminantPyrosequencingFermentationFood scienceButyrateMicrobiologyAgronomyBacteriaBiochemistryEndocrinologyLactationEcologyPasture

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Effects of subacute ruminal acidosis (SARA) challenges on the bacteria in rumen fluid, cecal digesta, and feces of dairy cows were determined using 454 pyrosequencing and real-time quantitative PCR. Six non-lactating Holstein cows with cannulas in the rumen and cecum were used in a 3 × 3 Latin square arrangement of treatments. During the first 3 wk of each experimental period, cows received a control diet containing 70% forages on a dry matter (DM) basis. In wk 4 of each period, cows received one of three diets: 1) the control diet; 2) a diet in which 34% of the dietary DM was replaced with pellets of ground wheat and barley (GBSC); or 3) a diet in which 37% of dietary DM was replaced with pellets of ground alfalfa (APSC). Rumen fluid, cecal digesta and feces were collected on d 5 of wk 4 of each period and the composition of the bacterial community was studied. Rumen fermentation responses were reported in a companion study. Both SARA-inducing challenges resulted in similar digesta pH depressions (as shown by the companion study), and reduced bacterial richness and diversity in rumen fluid, but GBSC had the larger effect. None of the challenges affected these measures in cecal digesta, and only GBSC reduced bacterial richness and diversity in feces. Only GBSC reduced the abundance of Bacteroidetes in rumen fluid. Associations among the abundances of the gram-negative bacterial phyla and the concentrations of free lipopolysaccharide endotoxin reported in the companion study in the rumen could not be established. Effects of the GBSC on the abundances of bacterial genera identified by pyrosequencing in the rumen, cecum and feces were limited. The APSC did not affect any of these abundances. Both challenges increased the abundances of several starch, pectin, xylan, dextrin, lactate, succinate, and sugar fermenting bacterial species in the rumen, cecum, and feces as determined by qPCR. Only GBSC increased that of Megasphaera elsdenii in the rumen. Both challenges decreased the abundance of Streptococcus bovis, and increased that of Escherichia coli, in cecal digesta and feces, with GBSC having the larger effect. These results showed that the

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)0.000
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 score0.829
Threshold uncertainty score0.393

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.223 · 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

Citations130
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in MicrobiologySame topicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive PhysiologyFrench-language works237,207