MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2586596374

Evaluation of corn and barley varieties in extensive winter grazing systems for beef calves

2017· dissertation· en· W2586596374 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Stephanie A McMillan

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity Library - University of Saskatchewan (University of Saskatchewan) · 2017
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMinistry of Agriculture - Saskatchewan
KeywordsGrazingAgronomyBeef cattleBiologyAgroforestryAnimal science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Two experiments were conducted to determine the suitability of whole plant corn as an alternative forage to whole plant barley for winter grazing and the subsequent effect of extensive winter grazing systems on performance and carcass characteristics of beef steers during feedlot finishing. Experiment 1 evaluated the in vitro digestibility of dry matter (IVDMD) and neutral detergent fibre (IVNDFD) of whole plant corn (COR), whole plant barley (BAR) and processed barley hay (CON) collected on October and February sampling dates over 2 yrs. COR forage had similar (P>0.05) IVDMD and IVNDF to both CON or BAR forage. The IVDMD and IVNDFD also remained similar (P>0.05) between the October and February sampling date for COR and BAR forages and processed barley hay. Experiment 2 evaluated the effects of grazing either swathed whole plant barley, standing whole plant corn, or drylot fed barley hay on forage quality, estimated intake, calf performance and backgrounding production costs over 2 years. In each year, 120 spring born Angus calves (263.3 ± 5 kg; 169 d of age) were fall weaned, stratified by body weight and randomly allocated to 1 of 3 replicated (n = 2) backgrounding systems: 1) field grazing standing whole plant corn (COR); 2) field grazing swathed whole plant barley (BAR); or 3) dry lot (CON) bunk fed processed barley hay. Calves fed COR and BAR were limit grazed in 4-ha paddocks for a 3-d grazing period using electric fencing for an average of 97 d over 2 yr, with all calves receiving a pelleted supplement (78% TDN, 16% CP) daily at 0.8% BW. A randomized complete block design (RCBD) was used to analyze crop yield, crop quality, dry matter intake (DMI), body weight (BW), average daily gain (ADG), total system cost and cost of gain (COG) over the 2 yr trial. Forage samples were collected every 21 d to determine forage quality. Protein content was greater (P<0.01) for CON (11.1%) compared to BAR and COR forage (10.1 and 7.9%, respectively). Neutral detergent fibre was greater (P=0.03) for BAR (63.3%) compared to CON (60.3%), while COR forage (62.9%) was not different (P>0.05) from either CON or BAR forage. Acid detergent fibre was not different (P>0.05) between the 3 forage types. Total digestible nutrients and net energy for gain were greater (P<0.01) for the COR forage (62.3% and 0.36 Mcal/d, respectively) compared to CON (57.8% and 0.30 Mcal/d, respectively) and BAR (59.0% and 0.32 Mcal/d, respectively). Calcium was greater (P<0.01) for CON and BAR (0.39 and 0.37%) compared to COR (0.20%) forage. Phosphorus content was greater (P<0.01) for CON (0.27%) then BAR (0.23%) and COR (0.20%) forage. There was no difference (P>0.05) in DMI, BW, ADG or COG between the 3 backgrounding systems. Total cost of production was greatest (P<0.05) for CON calves ($2.57/calf/day) compared to COR and BAR calves (1.40 and 1.48 $/calf/day). Net return was greatest for COR and BAR calves (65.03 and 61.60 $/hd, respectively) compared to CON calves ($-28.85/hd). After backgrounding, replicates of calves were divided into 2 groups and placed in a feedlot each year of the trial. Calves were fed a barley silage based diet with either barley or corn grain for 203 d to a weight of 667.8 ± 5 kg, at which point they were slaughtered and carcass data was collected. A RCBD split plot was used to analyze DMI, BW, ADG, dressing %, hot carcass weight (HCW), ribeye area, and marbling score while quality and yield grade data were analyzed using the GLIMMIX macro with a binomial error structure and logit data transformation. Dressing % was greatest for both COR and CON steers fed the corn grain diet (58.9%) and HCW was greatest (P<0.05) for COR steers fed a corn grain diet (397.5 kg). There was no difference (P>0.05) in BW, DMI, ADG, yield grade or carcass characteristics among systems, suggesting that backgrounding calves by field grazing either standing whole plant corn or swathed barley is a viable option to decrease winter feeding costs without having an effect on finishing performance.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.184 · 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 designBench or experimental
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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity Library - University of Saskatchewan (University of Saskatchewan)Same topicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive PhysiologyFrench-language works237,207