MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2594659622 · doi:10.1139/cjas-2016-0234

Interaction effect of photoperiod management and dietary grain allocation on productivity of lactating dairy cows

2017· article· en· W2594659622 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Oswald Santiago Espinoza, M. Oba

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Animal Science · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersAlberta Livestock and Meat AgencyUniversity of Alberta
KeywordsLatin squareLactationphotoperiodismDry matterAnimal scienceBiologyProductivityDairy cattleFood scienceBotanyRumenPregnancy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this study was to determine the interaction effects of photoperiod management and dietary grain allocation on the productivity of lactating dairy cows. Sixty Holstein cows in mid-lactation (days in milk = 113 ± 36.0; mean ± SD) were assigned to either a long photoperiod (LP; 16 h light) or a short photoperiod (SP; 8 h light) treatment. After a 30 d light adaptation period, cows within each photoperiod treatment were fed three diets differing in the grain content (15%, 25%, and 35% of dietary dry matter) in a 3 × 3 Latin square design. Cows exposed to the LP increased milk yield compared with those exposed to the SP (39.0 vs. 36.8 kg d−1) after a 30 d of light adaptation period. Although the positive effect of LP was not sustained after cows were assigned to dietary treatments in a 3 × 3 Latin square design, cows fed the 35% grain diet increased fat-corrected milk yield compared with those fed 25% or 15% grain diet (35.9 vs. 33.4 or 32.9 kg d−1, respectively). This study indicated that LP management and feeding high grain diets did not lead to synergistic effects on productivity of dairy cows.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.239 · 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

Citations5
Published2017
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Animal ScienceSame topicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive PhysiologyFrench-language works237,207