Invited Review: Growth, voluntary intake, and digestion and metabolism of North American bison
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Published literature on growth, voluntary intake, and nutrient digestion and metabolism of North American bison (Bison bison) was reviewed to create an information base for implementing management strategies. The information came from refereed scientific journals, published textbooks, experiment station reports, and PhD dissertations. After narrowly avoiding extinction in the 1880s, about 400,000 North American bison are in the United States and Canada today. Voluntary intake and growth are depressed during the winter and rebound during the following spring and summer. Domestic cattle and bison share similar grazing behavior, intake capacity, and ruminal fermentation characteristics. Greater DM digestion coefficients for bison compared with cattle appear to result from less DMI for bison than cattle in the studies. With the exceptions of red blood cell quantity and characteristics, and greater glucose and BUN concentrations, bison and cattle have similar blood histology profiles, enzyme activities, and mineral and metabolite concentrations. Available forage biomass and nutritive value, not capacity to eat, will limit acquisition of needed nutrition by grazing bison. Management of domestic herds should take into consideration the annual “winter slump” in intake and growth. Any putative advantage in fiber fermentation capacity in bison compared with cattle does not appear to be due to differences in ruminal microbial populations.In feedlots, bison consumed feed DM equal to about 2.5% of BW, gained 750 g/d, and converted feed to gain at 9% efficiency.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.003 |
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".