Effects of rumen-protected conjugated linoleic acid (CLA) on performance of primiparous and multiparous cows in the transition period
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study was to determine if the production effects of dietary rumen-protected conjugated linoleic acid (RP-CLA) supplemented to dairy cows during the transition period depend on parity.Twenty four Polish Holstein-Friesian pregnant cows and sixteen pregnant heifers were allocated to four treatments: 1. primiparous cows fed a diet without RP-CLA; 2. primiparous cows fed a diet with RP-CLA (60 g/cow/day); 3. multiparous cows fed a diet without RP-CLA; and 4. multiparous cows fed a diet with RP-CLA (60 g/cow/day).The RP-CLA was offered in pre-and postpartum total mixed ration diets from day 21 before expected parturition until day 60 after parturition.Dry matter intake, milk yield and fat, and energy corrected milk yield were not affected by RP-CLA supplementation.RP-CLA supplementation reduced milk fat content by 10.9%, but had no effect on either protein or lactose content, or on yield of fat, protein and lactose.Body condition score (BCS), BCS changes and energy balance (EB) were not affected by RP-CLA addition.Plasma insulin-like growth factor 1 concentration increased in multiparous, but decreased in primiparous cows in response to RP-CLA supplementation (parity × diet interaction).The results of this study confirm that RP-CLA supplementation in transition period lowers milk fat content, but has no effect on milk energy output and EB of the cows.Although multiparous cows had a tendency for a greater decrease in milk fat content due to RP-CLA supplementation, an effect of RP-CLA on milk yield, milk composition and EB in primi-and multiparous cows was similar.
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) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".