MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3110258367 · doi:10.1139/cjas-2020-0122

Effects of the dietary grain content on rumen and fecal microbiota of dairy cows

2020· article· en· W3110258367 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Allan Kotz, Paula Azevedo, Ehsan Khafipour, J.C. Plaizier

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Animal Science · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsRumenFecesDry matterAnimal scienceBiologyForageStarchFood scienceComposition (language)FermentationBotanyMicrobiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Six non-lactating Holstein dairy cows received diets with forage to grain mixture ratios of 100:0 (G0), 75:25 (G25), and 50:50 (G50) that contained 0.5%, 10.0%, and 19.5% dry matter (DM) of starch, respectively. Rumen fluid and feces were sampled, and methane emissions were determined during the last week of 5 wk experimental periods. Taxonomic compositions of microbiota were determined using Illumina 16S rRNA sequencing. Increased grain feeding increased the acidity and volatile fatty acid concentrations of rumen fluid and feces, and decreased methane emissions expressed as L·kg −1 DM. Microbial diversities were highest for G25. The numbers of identified genera in rumen fluid were 185, 182, and 171 for G0, G25, and G50, respectively. In feces, these numbers were 197, 182, and 171 for these diets, respectively. In rumen digesta, seven genera were correlated positively to G0 and negatively to G50, and six genera were correlated negatively to G0 and positively to G50. In feces, 16 genera were correlated positively to G0 and negatively to G50, and 13 genera were correlated negatively to G0 and positively to G50. Increasing grain feeding affected a limited number of genera in rumen digesta and feces. This could not explain treatment effects on the functionalities of microbiota.

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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

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 studies0.0000.001
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.179 · 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

Citations13
Published2020
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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