MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3014933908 · doi:10.32534/jkd.v4i1.193

PENGARUH TINGKAT PEMBERIAN KONSENTRAT TERHADAP KUALITAS SUSU SAPI PERAH FH PERIODE LAKTASI KE-3

2024· article· id· W3014933908 on OpenAlexaff
Erri Rossiyanti, Retno Widyani, Rusita Rusita

Bibliographic record

VenueKandang Jurnal Peternakan · 2024
Typearticle
Languageid
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicLivestock Farming and Management
Canadian institutionsWiLAN (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnimal scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstrak Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui tingkat pemberian konsentrat terbaik untuk mendapatkan produksi susu dengan kualitas yang baik dan pakan efisiens pada sapi perah di wilayah kerja KUD Karya Nugraha Kelurahan Cipari Kecamatan Cigugur Kabupaten Kuningan. Penelitian dilaksanakan selama 2 (dua) minggu yaitu 22 September - 4 Oktober 2008 di KUD Karya Nugraha Kelurahan Cipari Kecamatan Cigugur Kabupaten Kuningan dengan menggunakan 24 ekor sapi laktasi ke 3 yang diberi pakan rumput gajah dengan bahan kering BK 22,2 % dan kadar protein 8,69 % dan konsentrat dengan BK 87,3% dan kadar protein 18% dengan kombinasi pemberian sesuai perlakuan dan diulang 4 kali. Kombinasi pemberian pakan yaitu : A= Konsentrat 25% dari BK pakan; B = Konsentrat 30% dari BK; C=Konsentrat 35% dari BK; D = Konsentrat 40% dari BK; E=Konsentrat 45% dari BK; F=Konsentrat 50% dari BK. Hasil dari penelitian ini yaitu bahwa pemberian pakan konsentrat dengan kadar 40 – 50% dari BK kebutuhan pakan menghsilkan susu sapi dengan kualitas yang baik sesuai dengan ketentuan Milk Codex yaitu Kadar lemak 3,68 – 3,70 % , SNF 8% dengan pemberian pakan yang paling efisien.Kata Kunci : Konsentrat, Susu Sapi Perah FH dan laktasi ke-3

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.048
Threshold uncertainty score0.160

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0480.011

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.233 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueKandang Jurnal PeternakanSame topicLivestock Farming and ManagementFrench-language works237,207