PSXII-11 The effects of feeding finishing cattle benzoic acid and/or live active yeast (Saccharomyces cerevisiae) on feeding behaviour, growth performance, and carcass characteristics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In a randomized complete block design, 59 Angus-cross finishing steers were used to evaluate the effects of benzoic acid, active dry Saccharomyces cerevisiae or a combination of both when supplemented in a high-grain finishing diet on feeding behavior, animal performance, and carcass characteristics. Steers were fed for 106 d (77% high-moisture corn, 16% alfalfa haylage, 6% soybean meal, 1% mineral and vitamin supplement with salt and limestone) containing: no supplementation (CON; n = 15), 0.5% benzoic acid (ACD; n = 14), 3 g/hd/d active dry S. cerevisiae (YST; n = 15), or both 0.5% benzoic acid and 3 g/hd/d S. cerevisiae (AY; n = 11). Every 14 d steers were weighed, and ultrasound images for rib and rump fat thickness were collected at the beginning, middle, and end of the experiment. Insentec feeding stations were used to collect individual animal feeding behaviour data and DMI throughout the study. Data were analyzed using PROC GLIMMIX of SAS with initial BW as a covariate. Benzoic acid supplementation increased (P = 0.002) overall DMI compared to YST and AY steers, which was due to faster eating rates for ACD steers (P ≤ 0.008). Individual animal DMI variation was greater (P = 0.001) for ACD and AY steers. Rumen pH was greater (P = 0.006) for ACD steers vs. CON and AY steers (6.16, 5.84, and 5.66, respectively). Growth performance measures were similar (P ≥ 0.11) between treatment groups. Aspartate aminotransferase concentrations in blood were greatest (P ≤ 0.01) for YST steers, which was reflected in greater proportions of abscessed livers at slaughter. Carcass characteristics did not differ (P ≥ 0.68) between treatment groups. The results from this experiment suggest that steers fed a high grain finishing diet supplemented with benzoic acid, Saccharomyces cerevisiae or both had similar growth performance and carcass characteristics as a control group. The addition of benzoic acid increased eating rate and elevated rumen pH, which was ultimately reflected in increased DMI.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".