MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3048357338 · doi:10.3168/jds.2020-18785

Milk production responses, rumen fermentation, and blood metabolites of dairy cows fed increasing concentrations of forage rape (Brassica napus ssp. Biennis)

2020· article· en· W3048357338 on OpenAlexaff
Juan Pablo Keim, José Daza, Ignacio Beltrán, Óscar Balocchi, Rubén Pulido, Pilar Sepúlveda-Varas, D. Pacheco, R. Berthiaume

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Dairy Science · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
Canadian institutionsValacta (Canada)
FundersFondo Nacional de Desarrollo Científico y Tecnológico
KeywordsLatin squareDry matterRumenSilageForageMealLactationCanolaAnimal scienceSoybean mealRapeseedDairy cattleFood scienceTotal mixed rationBiologyChemistryFermentationAgronomyIce calving

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this study was to determine animal performance, rumen fermentation, and health-related blood metabolites of dairy cows in mid lactation fed with increasing levels (30 and 45%) of forage rape (FR) in the diet. Twelve pregnant multiparous lactating Holstein-Friesian dairy cows were randomly allocated to 1 of 3 dietary treatments in a replicated 3 × 3 Latin square design. The experiment was divided into three 21-d periods. For the control diet, 13.0 kg (dry matter, DM) of grass silage, 3.0 kg DM of commercial concentrate, 2.7 kg of DM cold-pressed extracted canola meal, and 0.45 kg DM of solvent-extracted soybean meal were offered daily. For the other two treatments, 30 and 45% of the DM from silage, canola meal, and commercial concentrate were replaced in equal proportions with FR. Data were analyzed individually using linear and quadratic orthogonal polynomials. Ingestive behavior was altered by the inclusion of FR. We observed a linear increase in eating time at the expense of rumination time. Nevertheless, total DM intake was not affected by dietary treatments, averaging 19.5 ± 0.24 kg of DM/d. Milk yield increased linearly with increasing concentration of FR in the diet. Thus, feed efficiency of cows (kg of milk/kg of DM intake) increased linearly with the percentage of FR in the diet. Inclusion of FR in the diet had no effect on milk composition or milk sensory characteristics. Mean rumen pH of cows decreased linearly from the control to the 45% FR diet; however, dietary treatments had no effect on the daily amount of time that rumen pH was below 5.8 (252 ± 71.4), indicating no risk of subacute ruminal acidosis. Concentrations of total volatile fatty acids in the rumen and molar proportions of acetate and butyrate were increased with FR inclusion, whereas the proportion of propionate was linearly reduced. Excretion of uric acid and total purine derivatives tended to be greater for cows fed FR, which resulted in a trend toward a linear increase in estimated microbial N flow. However, N use efficiency was not affected by FR inclusion. Although differences for some hematological measures (increased white blood cell and neutrophils counts) and a quadratic response for glutamate dehydrogenase for cows fed FR in the diet (decreased with inclusion of 30% and increased with 45% in the diet) were observed, all values were within appropriate ranges for dairy cows. These results indicated that including FR to dairy cow diets, up to 45% of diet DM, improved milk production due to changes in volatile fatty acids and predicted microbial N flow and had no negative effects on dairy cow health or sensory characteristics of milk.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.231 · 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

Citations21
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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