Effect of dietary flax seed and oil on milk yield, gross composition, and fatty acid profile in dairy cows: A meta-analysis and meta-regression
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Several experiments were conducted over the past few years to evaluate the feeding value of flax seed and oil in dairy cow diets. The current meta-analysis and meta-regression was undertaken to assess the overall effect of different forms of flax, as a source of trienoic (cis-9,cis-12,cis-15 18:3) fatty acids (FA), on lactation performance and on transfer efficiency of its constituent n-3 FA from diet to milk fat. Comparisons were first conducted with nonsupplemented controls or with diets containing either saturated (mainly 16:0 or 18:0 or both), monoenoic (mainly cis-9 18:1), or dienoic (mainly cis-9,cis-12 18:2) FA. Results indicate that supplementing flax seed and oil decreased dry matter intake, as well as actual and energy-corrected milk yield without affecting the efficiency of utilization of dietary dry matter or energy as compared with nonsupplemented iso-energetic controls. When compared with the other 3 types of dietary fat evaluated, flax rich in trienoic FA supported a yield of energy-corrected milk similar to supplements rich in saturated, monoenoic, or dienoic FA. Greater milk fat concentration and feed efficiency were observed with saturated supplements. However, milk fat concentration and yield were lower with dienoic FA than with flax supplements. Further analyses were conducted to compare the effect of different forms of flax oil, seed, or fractions of seed. Among the 6 categories evaluated, mechanically processed whole seed (rolled or ground) allowed the greatest yield of energy-corrected milk and the best feed efficiency when compared with free oil, intact or extruded whole seed, protected flax, and flax hulls. Feeding protected flax and flax hulls allowed the greatest milk fat concentration of cis-9,cis-12,cis-15 18:3. Moreover, the greatest transfer efficiencies of this fatty acid from diet to milk were recorded with the same 2 treatments, plus the mechanically processed whole seed. These results make this last category the most suitable treatment, among the 6 flax forms evaluated, to combine optimum lactation performance and protection of flax constituent cis-9,cis-12,cis-15 18:3.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.013 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.011 | 0.042 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".