MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2910625827 · doi:10.3168/jds.2018-14721

Effect of dietary fat supplementation on methane emissions from dairy cows fed wheat or corn

2019· article· en· W2910625827 on OpenAlexaff
P.S. Alvarez-Hess, S.R.O. Williams, J. L. Jacobs, M.C. Hannah, K. A. Beauchemin, Richard Eckard, W. J. Wales, G.L. Morris, Peter J. Moate

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Dairy Science · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDry matterCanolaSoybean mealAnimal scienceHayMealAgronomyDairy cattleDistillers grainsChemistryFood scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Diets that contain high proportions of either wheat or supplementary fat have been individually reported to reduce enteric methane production. The objective of this research was to determine the effect of dietary fat supplementation on methane emissions and milk yield from cows fed diets containing either corn or wheat grains. It was hypothesized that cows fed a diet containing wheat would produce less methane and have lower methane yield (methane per kg of dry matter intake; MY) than cows fed a diet containing corn and that methane mitigation from fat supplementation would occur irrespective of the type of grain in the basal diet. The experiment involved 32 Holstein-Friesian dairy cows allocated to 1 of 4 treatment groups (n = 8) and individually fed different diets restricted to approximately 90% of their mean ad libitum intake measured during a covariate period. All animals were offered 11.5 kg of dry matter/d of alfalfa hay, 1.8 kg of dry matter/d of solvent-extracted canola meal, and 1 of 4 dietary supplements. Dietary supplements were 8 kg of dry matter/d of either corn or wheat, or these same treatments with the addition of 0.8 kg of canola oil. In this 5-wk experiment, d 1 to 7 served as the covariate period, d 8 to 14 as the transition period, d 15 to 28 as the adaptation period, and d 29 to 35 as the experimental period. Cows were fed their full treatment diets from d 15 to 35 during which time milk production and feed intake were measured daily. During d 29 to 35, methane production was measured for individual cows daily using the sulfur hexafluoride tracer method. The resulting averages for milk production and feed intake were analyzed by analysis of covariance with factorial grain by fat as treatment structure, animal as the unit within blocks, and the corresponding milk production or feed intake covariate averages as principal covariate. Data on milk fatty acids, ruminal fluid data on pH, ammonia, volatile fatty acids, protozoa, and methane were analyzed by ANOVA using the same treatment and blocking structures excluding the principal covariate. Cows fed a diet containing wheat had greater MY than cows fed a diet containing corn. Irrespective of the type of grain in the diet, increasing the fat concentration from 2 to 6% dry matter reduced MY. It is concluded that the grain component in the basal diet does not affect the mitigating effects of dietary fat supplements on MY.

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: none
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)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.269 · 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

Citations41
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Dairy ScienceSame topicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive PhysiologyFrench-language works237,207