MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2729708278 · doi:10.2527/jas.2017.1460

Effects of encapsulated nitrate on growth performance, nitrate toxicity, and enteric methane emissions in beef steers: Backgrounding phase1,2

2017· article· en· W2729708278 on OpenAlexafffund
C. Lee, Rafael Canonenco de Araújo, K. M. Koenig, K. A. Beauchemin

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Animal Science · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
FundersAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaEnvironment WalesClimate Change and Emissions Management Corporation
KeywordsUreaAnimal scienceRandomized block designNitrateChemistryBeef cattleAmmonium nitrateCrossbreedAmmoniaFood scienceBiologyAgronomyBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A long-term experiment was conducted to examine the effects of feeding encapsulated nitrate (EN) on growth, enteric methane production, and nitrate (NO) toxicity in beef cattle fed a backgrounding diet. A total of 108 crossbred steers (292 ± 18 kg) were blocked by BW and randomly assigned to 18 pens. The pens (experimental unit; 6 animals per pen) received 3 dietary treatments: Control, a backgrounding diet supplemented with urea; 1.25% EN, control diet supplemented with 1.25% encapsulated calcium ammonium NO (i.e., EN) in dietary DM, which partially replaced urea; or 2.5% EN, control diet supplemented with 2.5% EN (DM basis) fully replacing urea. Additionally, 24 steers were located in 4 pens and randomly assigned to 1 of the above 3 dietary treatments plus a fourth treatment: 2.3% UEN, control diet supplemented with 2.3% unencapsulated calcium ammonium NO (UEN) fully replacing urea. Animals in the additional 4 pens were used for methane measurement in respiratory chambers, and the pens (except UEN) were also part of the performance study (i.e., = 7 pens/treatment). The experiment was conducted for 91 d in a randomized complete block design. During the experiment, DMI was not affected by inclusion of EN in the diet. Feeding EN had no effect on BW, ADG, and G:F ( ≥ 0.57). Methane production (g/d) tended to decrease ( = 0.099) with EN and UEN, but yield (g/kg DMI) did not differ ( = 0.56) among treatments. Inclusion of EN in the diet increased ( ≤ 0.02) sorting of the diets in favor of large and medium particles and against small and fine particles, resulting in considerable increases in NO concentrations of orts without affecting DMI. Plasma NO-N and NO-N concentrations increased ( ≤ 0.05) for EN compared with Control in a dose response manner, but blood methemoglobin levels were below the detection limit. Nitrate concentration in fecal samples slightly increased (from 0.01% to 0.14% DM; < 0.01) with increasing levels of EN in the diet. In conclusion, EN can be used as a feed additive replacing urea in beef cattle during a backgrounding phase in the long term without NO intoxication or any negative effects on growth performance. In addition, the study confirmed that feeding EN tended to decrease enteric methane production in the long term.

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)0.000
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.251 · 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

Citations26
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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