MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3003193945 · doi:10.1093/tas/txaa011

Effect of a pine enhanced biochar on growth performance, carcass quality, and feeding behavior of feedlot steers1

2020· article· en· W3003193945 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueTranslational Animal Science · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of SaskatchewanUniversity of LethbridgeAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
FundersAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaAlberta Agriculture and Forestry
KeywordsFeedlotAnimal scienceDry matterCrossbreedFeed conversion ratioWeight gainBody weightForageBiocharCarcass weightBiologyMathematicsChemistryAgronomyEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of enhanced biochar (EB) on growth performance, carcass quality, and feeding behavior of feedlot steers fed high-forage and high-grain diets. A total of 160 crossbred steers (initial 286 ± 26 kg body weight [BW]) were blocked by BW and randomly assigned to 16 pens (10 steers per pen), 8 of which were equipped with the GrowSafe system for monitoring feeding behavior. Treatments were EB included in the diet at 0% (control), 0.5%, 1.0%, or 2.0% (dry matter [DM] basis) with four pens per treatment. The backgrounding phase (84 d) was divided into four 21-d periods, and the finishing phase (112 d) was divided into four 28-d periods, with a 28-d transition period for dietary adaptation. Pen was the experimental unit for all parameters except for feeding behavior, where steer was considered the experimental unit. Treatment was included as a fixed effect, and period was considered a repeated measure. Total weight gain and overall average daily gain (ADG) tended to decrease (P = 0.06) with 2.0% EB. There was no effect (P ≥ 0.13) of EB on dry matter intake (DMI), gain-to-feed ratio (G:F), net energy for gain, ADG, or final BW for the backgrounding or finishing phases. There was a treatment × period effect (P < 0.05) of EB on DMI, ADG, and G:F for both backgrounding and finishing phases. Hot carcass weight, dressing %, back fat, rib-eye area, and meat yield were not affected (P ≥ 0.26) by EB. Lean meat yield was increased (P = 0.03) by 2.0% EB compared to all other treatments. Compared to the control, 2.0% EB increased (P = 0.02) the number of carcasses that achieved Canada 1 grade. More (P = 0.05) carcasses from control steers were graded as Canada 3 as compared to those fed 0.5% or 2.0% EB. Quality grade and incidences of liver abscesses were not affected (P ≥ 0.44) by EB. Enhanced biochar had no effect (P ≥ 0.11) on feeding behavior during backgrounding or finishing phases. In conclusion, EB did not result in changes in growth rate, feed efficiency, or feeding behavior in feedlot cattle, but 2.0% EB increased lean carcass yield grade.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.555
Threshold uncertainty score0.157

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.246 · 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