MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2786274578 · doi:10.1139/cjz-2017-0036

Heavier rumen–reticulum organs in white-tailed deer (<i>Odocoileus virginianus</i>) is consistent with dietary bulk not quality

2018· article· en· W2786274578 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Floyd W. Weckerly, Gayatri Bhaskar, Adam Duarte, Ryan S. Luna, Heath D. Starns

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Zoology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOdocoileusRumenBiologyReticulumAnimal scienceGastrointestinal tractDigestion (alchemy)FecesZoologyEcologyEndoplasmic reticulumFood scienceBiochemistryFermentationChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The organs that make up the gastrointestinal tract have high energy demands. Therefore, when these organs vary in mass, they should impact metabolic requirements. Mass of the rumen–reticulum organs, the organs that comprise the largest part of the gastrointestinal tract of ruminants, might vary from bulk or nutrient availability of the diet. We examined differences in mass of the rumen–reticulum organs in white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus (Zimmermann, 1780)) from two sites in Texas, USA, with different diet types. Specifically, at one site deer were fed a pelleted ration and at the other site deer consumed a natural browse diet. Accounting for body mass, deer consuming the browse diet had rumen–reticulum organ masses that were about 1.7 times heavier than deer consuming the pelleted diet. Deer consuming the browse diet also had lower diet quality, as indexed by crude protein concentration, than deer consuming the pelleted diet. The digesta loads of deer, however, were similar for the two types of diet. Our study findings are consistent with increased mass of rumen–reticulum organs from greater bulk, not diet quality. Understanding variation in rumen–reticulum organ mass has implications for understanding energy conservation in white-tailed deer.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.239
Teacher spread0.212 · 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

Citations4
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Zoology→Same topicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology→French-language works237,207→