MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3013257985 · doi:10.1139/cjas-2019-0032

Methane and carbon dioxide emissions from yearling beef heifers and mature cows classified for residual feed intake under drylot conditions

2020· article· en· W3013257985 on OpenAlexaffvenue
G. Manafiazar, V. S. Baron, Lisa McKeown, H. C. Block, Kim Ominski, Graham Plastow, J. A. Basarab

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Animal Science · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicEffects of Environmental Stressors on Livestock
Canadian institutionsAgriculture Food and Rural DevelopmentUniversity of ManitobaAlberta Crop Industry Development FundAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaAlberta Livestock and Meat AgencyUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsResidual feed intakeAnimal scienceBeef cattleCrossbreedDry matterFeed conversion ratioPurebredTotal mixed rationChemistryBiologyBody weightLactationIce calvingEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study quantified methane (CH4) and carbon dioxide (CO2) production from beef heifers and cows classified for residual feed intake adjusted for off-test backfat thickness (RFIfat) and reared in drylot during cold winter temperatures. Individual performance, daily feed intake, and RFIfat were obtained for 1068 crossbred and purebred yearling heifers (eight trials) as well as 176 crossbred mature cows (six trials) during the winters of 2015–2017 at two locations. A portion of these heifers (147 high RFIfat; 167 low RFIfat) and cows (69 high RFIfat; 70 low RFIfat) was monitored for enteric CH4 and CO2 emissions using the GreenFeed Emissions Monitoring (GEM) system (C-Lock Inc., Rapid City, SD, USA). Low RFIfat cattle consumed less feed [heifers, 7.80 vs. 8.48 kg dry matter (DM) d−1; cows, 11.64 vs. 13.16 kg DM d−1] and emitted less daily CH4 (2.5% for heifers; 3.7% for cows) and CO2 (1.4% for heifers; 3.4% for cows) compared with high RFIfat cattle. However, low RFIfat heifers and cows had higher CH4 (6.2% for heifers; 9.9% for cows) and CO2 yield (7.3% for heifers; 9.8% for cows) per kilogram DM intake compared with their high RFIfat pen mates. The GEM system performed at air temperatures between +20 and −30 °C. Feed intake of heifers and mature cows was differently affected by ambient temperature reduction between +20 and −15 °C and similarly increased their feed intake at temperatures below −15 °C. In conclusion, low RFIfat animals emit less daily enteric CH4 and CO2, due mainly to lower feed consumption at equal body weight, gain, and fatness.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.992
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Citations15
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Animal ScienceSame topicEffects of Environmental Stressors on LivestockFrench-language works237,207