Effect of fish oil supplementation and forage source on Holstein bulls performance, carcass characteristics and fatty acids profile
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Thirty-six Holstein bulls (initial body weight, 345 ± 61 kg) were randomly assigned to six dietary treatments with a 2 × 3 factorial arrangement, with two levels of AH (alfalfa hay) (10 and 20% of AH) combining with three levels of FO (fish oil) (0, 1 and 2.1% of DM) to investigate the effects of AH proportion and FO supplementation on performance, carcase characteristics, and meat fatty acids profile. DMI (dry matter intake) (kg/day) was lower (p < .01) for high (8.0) than for low (8.7) AH. Highest level of FO reduced DMI (p < .01) regardless of AH level. Dietary inclusion of FO increased the concentration of VA (p < .01), CLA (p < .01) and n-3 (p < .01) fatty acids which subsequently reduced n-6: n-3 (p < .01). The results indicate that AH can be replaced by corn (zea mays) silage to mitigate the detrimental effect of supplemented fat on dry matter intake. Moreover, FO can be supplemented to feedlot diet to enrich ruminant products without deleterious effects on carcase characteristics.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".