MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2742615198 · doi:10.2527/asasann.2017.257

257 Ruminal volatile fatty acid concentration and microbial populations as a proxy for of feed efficiency in beef steers

2017· article· en· W2742615198 on OpenAlexaff
P. B. A. I. K. Bulumulla, M. M. Li, Yongyan Chen, Fuyong Li, R.R. White, M.D. Hanigan, Graham Plastow, Ling Guan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Animal Science · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsResidual feed intakeRumenFeed conversion ratioDry matterBiologyAnimal scienceAnimal feedBeef cattleFood scienceDigestion (alchemy)NutrientRuminantFermentationBiotechnologyAgronomyChemistryBody weightPastureEcologyChromatography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Breeding and management of animals to achieve improved feed efficiency is a significant priority for the beef industry. Feed conversion ratio (FCR) and residual feed intake (RFI) have become popular measurements for feed efficiency, although both have limitations and practical challenges. The identification of additional, cost-effective indicators of feed efficiency is needed to improve breeding programs. We hypothesized that volatile fatty acids (VFAs), the end products of rumen microbial fermentation and the primary energy source for ruminants, could potentially dictate feed utilization for growth and production. In this study, we tested whether residual VFA (rVFAs) could serve as a predictor of feed efficiency. Rumen content was collected from a total of 204 beef (Angus, Charolais, and Kinsella composite) steers raised under a Growsafe® system, and VFA concentrations (mol/L) were analyzed by gas chromatography. Microbial populations were estimated using total copy numbers of 16S rRNA genes for bacteria and archaea using quantitative PCR (qPCR). Animal phenotypic measures including body weight (BW), dry matter intake (DMI), average daily gain (ADG), feeding frequency, RFI, and carcass performances were collected. The feed was collected at the time of rumen sample collection, and its nutrient content was analyzed. VFA concentrations and production rates were predicted using the Molly mathematical model for each animal based on observed BW, DMI, and ration composition. Residual VFA concentrations were calculated as observed minus predicted VFA concentration. The relationships among digestion parameters and rVFA were tested using stepwise, backward linear regression, which was also used to test rVFA as a predictor of feed efficiency. Residual acetate (ResAc), propionate (ResPro), and total VFA concentrations were significantly correlated with BW, DMI, and breed. Residual butyrate (ResBu) was correlated only with DMI. Total bacterial copy number was negatively correlated with eating frequency (P < 0.05) and ResAc (P < 0.01) and positively associated with ResPro (P < 0.01) concentrations. Total archeal copy number was inversely related to ResPro. RFI was significantly affected by DMI (P < 0.01) and ResAc and showed a significant negative relationship with ResPr and ResBu (P < 0.05). Similarly, FCR was significantly affected by DMI, ADG, and breed. Both ResPr and ResBu had non-significant (P < 0.1), inverse relationships with FCR. Although the work needs to be independently evaluated, our preliminary results identified the potential of using rVFA concentrations to predict feed efficiency traits in beef steers.

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: Observational
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.258 · 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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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