MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2895295378 · doi:10.1093/tas/txy111

Association between residual feed intake and enteric methane emissions in Hereford steers

2018· article· en· W2895295378 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueTranslational Animal Science · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCHIST-ERAAgencia Nacional de Investigación e Innovación
KeywordsResidual feed intakeAnimal scienceSilageFeedlotSorghumBeef cattleFeed conversion ratioBiologyTotal mixed rationPopulationMethane emissionsChemistryMethaneAgronomyBody weightEcologyLactation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The objective of this study was to quantify the emissions of enteric CH4 from growing Hereford steers raised under feedlot conditions based on contrasting levels of residual feed intake (RFI). A repeated measurements experiment was conducted over 20 d to determine CH4 production from two groups of nine Hereford steers, with contrasting RFI values (mean ± SD): low RFI (LRFI group; −0.78 ± 0.22 kg DMI/d) vs. high RFI (HRFI group; 0.83 ± 0.34 kg DMI/d). Steers were selected from a larger contemporary population in which the RFI was evaluated. Steers were maintained under confined conditions with ad libitum access to water and feed, comprising a total mixed ration of 55% sorghum silage, 21% barley silage, 21% corn grain, and 3% protein–mineral–vitamin–premix, provided twice a day. Before the beginning of CH4 measurements, the live weight of both groups of animals was determined, which on average (±SEM) was 357.0 ± 5.11 and 334.0 ± 10.17 kg in the LRFI and HRFI groups, respectively. Methane emission (g/d) was measured on each animal with the sulfur hexafluoride (SF6) tracer technique, during two consecutive periods of 5 d. Individual daily intake and feeding behavior characteristics were measured using a GrowSafe automated feeding system (Model 6000, GrowSafe Systems Ltd, Airdrie, Alberta, Canada). Methanogens in the ruminal content were quantified using quantitative polymerase chain reaction with primers targeting the mcrA gene. Methane emission was near 27% lower in animals with LRFI when expressed in absolute terms (g/d; 26.8%; P = 0.009), by unit of dry matter intake (g CH4/kg; 27.9%, P = 0.021), or as % of gross energy intake (26.7%; P = 0.027). These differences could not be explained by differences in amount of total of methanogens (average = 9.82 log10 units; P = 0.857). However, there were some differences in animal feeding behavior that could explain these differences (e.g., LRFI animals tended to spend less time in feeders). Our results suggest that, in Hereford steers, the selection by RFI values is a promising mitigation strategy for the reduction of the emission of enteric CH4.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.679
Threshold uncertainty score0.242

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.239 · 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