MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3017257978 · doi:10.3168/jds.2019-17698

The effects of feeding a high-fiber or high-starch pellet at two daily allocations on feed intake patterns, rumen fermentation, and milk production of mid-lactation dairy cows

2020· article· en· W3017257978 on OpenAlexafffund
J. Haisan, M. Oba

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Dairy Science · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPelletDry matterRumenLatin squareNeutral Detergent FiberAnimal scienceNutrientStarchPelletsChemistryLactationFermentationBiologyFood sciencePregnancy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this experiment was to determine the effect of pellet type and feeding amount on feeding behavior, dry matter intake, rumen fermentation, and milk production of lactating dairy cows. An experimental diet was formulated to provide an adequate amount of nutrients to a 650-kg cow producing 40 kg of milk per day, with a portion of the diet removed as a high-fiber (33.2% neutral detergent fiber; F) or high-starch (56.8% starch; S) pellet. Pellets were fed at a low (1 kg; L) or high (3 kg; H) amount twice per day alongside a partial mixed ration (PMR). Four complementary PMR were formulated for each pellet treatment such that the overall diet (pellet + PMR) offered to the cows was the same among all treatments. Eight ruminally cannulated cows were used in a 4 × 4 Latin square design with 14-d periods. Cows were fed PMR once daily at 1200 h, and pellet twice daily at 0600 and 1800 h. Data and samples were collected on d 11 to 14 of each period. By design there was a difference in pellet intake between the H and L treatments (5.31 vs. 1.81 kg/d), and PMR intake was reduced when H pellet was fed (22.9 vs. 25.3 kg/d); however, feeding H tended to increase total dry matter intake. Feed disappearance, which was measured as the amount of PMR consumed every 3 h following PMR delivery, was affected by the nutrient composition of the PMR as cows fed S (with high-fiber PMR) consumed 28.6% of their PMR intake within 3 h of delivery, whereas cows fed F (with high-starch PMR) consumed 33.5%. Duration that pH was below 5.8 tended to be lower when cows were fed the S pellet (270 vs. 125 min/d) compared with F. In addition, feeding the S pellet (with high-fiber PMR) decreased plasma concentrations of glucose (66.0 vs. 70.0 mg/dL) and insulin (1.90 vs. 2.25 ng/mL) compared with F. These results suggest that the composition of the PMR dictates rumen fermentation to a greater extent than composition of pellets. The S pellet was fed alongside a high-fiber PMR, which was more filling in the rumen, less fermentable, and contained more neutral detergent fiber. Although no difference was observed in milk production among treatments, the fact that feed intake pattern and rumen fermentation are better explained by nutrient composition of the PMR should be considered when formulating diets for lactating cows fed pellet and PMR, such as those milked with automated milking systems.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.237 · 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

Citations9
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Dairy Science→Same topicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology→French-language works237,207→