Edible forage yield and nutritive value of poplar and willow
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Poplar and willow on farms are a potential source of supplementary forage during summer. To incorporate poplar and willow into farm feed budgets, a method is needed to non-destructively estimate the edible forage yield of the trees. Also needed is an estimate of the nutritive value of the forage. Previously uncut trees on hill farms in the lower North Island were measured and a relationship between tree forage yield and diameter of the trunk at breast height (DBH, 1.4 m) was developed. The DBH was from 5 to 32 cm and the forage yield from 1 to 66 kg dry matter (DM)/tree. Nutritive value of poplar and willow (metabolisable energy 8-9 MJ/kg DM) was similar to that of normal summer pasture, but was lower in fibre and higher in soluble carbohydrate, and of higher nutritive value than drought pasture. The concentrations of the secondary chemicals condensed tannins and phenolic glycosides were high in poplars and willows, and they have some positive effects on livestock performance, but their role requires further research. It was concluded that poplar and willow provide forage of sufficient quantity and quality to warrant using them as supplements to pasture for feeding to livestock during summer droughts.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".