MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2901978362 · doi:10.3168/jds.2018-15064

Short communication: Risk of subacute ruminal acidosis affects the feed sorting behavior and milk production of early lactation cows

2018· article· en· W2901978362 on OpenAlexaff
Rachael E. Coon, T.F. Duffield, T.J. DeVries

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Dairy Science · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDry matterAnimal scienceAcidosisRuminationIce calvingLactationStrawTotal mixed rationRumenForageBiologyEndocrinologyFood sciencePregnancyAgronomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this study was to determine if the risk of developing subacute ruminal acidosis, as potentially affected by dietary straw particle size, influenced the feed sorting, rumination behavior, and milk production of early lactation dairy cows. Upon calving, 41 multiparous Holstein cows were fed a total mixed ration with 9% wheat straw (dry matter basis) chopped (1) using a 2.54-cm screen (short; n = 21) or (2) using a 5.08-cm screen (long; n = 20). For the first 4 wk following calving, rumination behavior (recorded using data loggers attached to neck collars) and reticulorumen pH (recorded using wireless telemetry boluses) were monitored 24 h/d. Due to technical failures, analyses were conducted on 38 cows (n = 19 per treatment). Total mixed ration and orts samples were collected every 3 d to determine feed sorting. Based on an acidosis index, created using area under the curve data (reticulorumen pH < 5.8) normalized for dry matter intake, cows were categorized as either low (LR) or high (HR) risk for developing subacute ruminal acidosis (SARA). Low risk cows had higher mean (6.3 vs. 6.1), minimum (6.0 vs. 5.7), and maximum (6.7 vs. 6.5) reticulorumen pH than HR cows. Low risk cows also had less severe area under the curve values (1.5 vs. 49.4 pH × min/d) and spent less time below a reticulorumen pH threshold of 5.8 (21.9 vs. 309.2 min/d). Although total milk yield was unaffected by SARA risk, LR cows produced more 4% fat-corrected milk (47.2 vs. 41.9 kg/d) and milk fat (2.1 vs. 1.8 kg/d) than HR cows. A SARA risk category × treatment interaction was detected for sorting all fractions of the diet; HR cows on the long treatment sorted against the longest particles in the diet, whereas LR cows on the same treatment did not sort this fraction, suggesting that SARA risk may be mitigated by a more balanced intake of physically effective fiber. High risk cows on the short treatment consumed the longest dietary particles as predicted, and sorted in favor of the physically effective medium and short particles. A SARA risk category × treatment interaction was detected for rumination behavior; within the long treatment, HR cows tended to ruminate less than LR cows (432.3 vs. 493.2 min/d). Overall, these results suggest that LR cows consumed a more balanced diet, whereas HR cows sorted their feed more, particularly when fed the diet containing long straw particles, which may have led to reduced rumination activity and yield of milk fat and fat-corrected milk.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

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)0.0020.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.247 · 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

Citations20
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Dairy Science→Same topicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology→French-language works237,207→