MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2982586417 · doi:10.1016/j.sciaf.2019.e00214

Forage growth, yield and nutritional characteristics of four varieties of napier grass (Pennisetum purpureum Schumach) in the west Usambara highlands, Tanzania

2019· article· en· W2982586417 on OpenAlexfundno aff
David Maleko, Angello Mwilawa, George Msalya, Liliane Pasape, Kelvin Mtei

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific African · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersWestern University
KeywordsPennisetum purpureumDry matterForageAgronomyFodderPastureBiomass (ecology)BiologyPennisetumProductivityAnimal science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Low pasture biomass production and dry seasons fodder scarcity are among the major challenges affecting productivity of dairy cattle in Tanzania. Field experiments were set to evaluate growth, biomass yields and nutritional contents of four napier grass (Pennisetum purpureum Schumach) varieties as feed for ruminants. Experimental napier varieties included Ouma, Kakamega 2 (KK2), Bana and local napier (LN). The study was conducted in the Western Usambara highlands (WUHs) in Tanzania between December 2016 and April 2017 (110 days). The results indicated that the varietal mean stem heights differed significantly (P<0.001); whereby LN, Ouma, KK2 and Bana had mean heights of 210.81, 185.72, 177.15 and 145.44 cm respectively. There was a significant difference (P = 0.025) in the mean total forage biomass production in which KK2, LN, Ouma and Bana yielded 16,551, 14,035, 12,868 and 8954 kg dry matter/ha respectively. The crude protein content averaged 9.92% and did not differ significantly across the varieties (P = 0.83). The mean metabolizable energy was 7.94 MJ/kg dry matter and did not differ significantly across the varieties (P = 0.11). The in vitro organic matter digestibility differed significantly (P = 0.03); 65.87, 59.22, 58.33 and 55.41% for Ouma, Bana, KK2 and LN respectively. This study demonstrates that Ouma and KK2 can be established in the WUHs for forage use due to higher biomass production. Further studies on ensiling and animal feeding would provide valuable information for optimizing forage conservation and animal performance in the WUHs and elsewhere with similar conditions.

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)0.000
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.184 · 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

Citations45
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific AfricanSame topicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive PhysiologyFrench-language works237,207