MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3042466843 · doi:10.1093/jas/skaa220

Milk production, nitrogen utilization, and methane emissions of dairy cows grazing grass, forb, and legume-based pastures

2020· article· en· W3042466843 on OpenAlexaff
R. L. Wilson, Massimo Bionaz, Jennifer W. MacAdam, K. A. Beauchemin, Harley D. Naumann, Serkan Ateş

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Animal Science · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsForbGrazingPastureAgronomyLegumeForageBiologyNeutral Detergent FiberDry matterDesmodiumAnimal scienceGrassland

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Achieving high animal productivity without degrading the environment is the primary target in pasture-based dairy farming. This study investigated the effects of changing the forage base in spring from grass-clover pastures to forb or legume-based pastures on milk yield, N utilization, and methane emissions of Jersey cows in Western Oregon. Twenty-seven mid-lactation dairy cows were randomly assigned to one of three pasture treatments: grass-clover-based pasture composed of festulolium, tall fescue, orchardgrass, and white clover (Grass); forb-based pasture composed of chicory, plantain, and white clover (Forb); and legume-based pasture composed of red clover, bird's-foot trefoil, berseem clover, and balansa clover (Legume). Pastures were arranged in a randomized complete block design with three replicates (i.e., blocks) with each replicate grazed by a group of three cows. Production and nutritive quality of the forages, animal performance, milk components, nitrogen partitioning, and methane emissions were measured. Feed quality and dry matter intake (DMI) of cows were greater (P ≤ 0.05) for Legume and Forb vs. Grass, with consequent greater milk and milk solids yields (P < 0.01). Cows grazing Forb also had more (P < 0.01) lactose and linoleic acid in milk compared with cows grazing the other pastures, and less (P = 0.04) somatic cell counts compared with Grass. Cows grazing Forb had substantially less (P < 0.01) N in urine, milk, and blood compared with cows grazing the other pastures, with not only a greater (P < 0.01) efficiency of N utilization for milk synthesis calculated using milk urea nitrogen but also a larger (P < 0.01) fecal N content, indicating a shift of N from urine to feces. Both Forb and Legume had a diuretic effect on cows, as indicated by the lower (P < 0.01) creatinine concentration in urine compared with Grass. Methane emissions tended to be less (P = 0.07) in cows grazed on Forb vs. the other pastures. The results indicate that Forb pasture can support animal performance, milk quality, and health comparable to Legume pasture; however, Forb pasture provides the additional benefit of reduced environmental impact of pasture-based dairy production.

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 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)0.001
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 score0.569
Threshold uncertainty score0.149

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations57
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Animal ScienceSame topicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive PhysiologyFrench-language works237,207