MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2982066914 · doi:10.3390/ani9110861

Chemical Composition, In Vitro Digestibility and Rumen Fermentation Kinetics of Agro-Industrial By-Products

2019· article· en· W2982066914 on OpenAlexaff
Jairo García-Rodríguez, María José Ranilla, J. France, Héctor Aláiz‐Moretón, M. D. Carro, Secundino López

Bibliographic record

VenueAnimals · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersUniversidad de LeónUniversidad Politécnica de CartagenaUniversidad de ZaragozaMinisterio de Ciencia, Innovación y Universidades
KeywordsAsparagusFood sciencePepperFermentationRumenSugarChemistrySugar beetPomaceBeet pulpChemical compositionOrange (colour)HorticultureBotanyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The nutritive value of 26 agro-industrial by-products was assessed from their chemical composition, in vitro digestibility and rumen fermentation kinetics. By-products from sugar beet, grape, olive tree, almond, broccoli, lettuce, asparagus, green bean, artichoke, peas, broad beans, tomato, pepper, apple pomace and citrus were evaluated. Chemical composition, in vitro digestibility and fermentation kinetics varied largely across the by-products. Data were subjected to multivariate and principal component analyses (PCA). According to a multivariate cluster analysis chart, samples formed four distinctive groups (A-D). Less degradable by-products were olive tree leaves, pepper skins and grape seeds (group A); whereas the more degradable ones were sugar beet, orange, lemon and clementine pulps (group D). In the PCA plot, component 1 segregated samples of groups A and B from those of groups C and D. Considering the large variability among by-products, most of them can be regarded as potential ingredients in ruminant rations. Depending on the characteristic nutritive value of each by-product, these feedstuffs can provide alternative sources of energy (e.g., citrus pulps), protein (e.g., asparagus rinds), soluble fibre (e.g., sugar beet pulp) or less digestible roughage (e.g., grape seeds or pepper skin).

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.206 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations81
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnimalsSame topicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive PhysiologyFrench-language works237,207