MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3172990156 · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-544388/v1

Different Ground Corn Particle Size in Supplements for Young Bulls Grazing During Intensive System Production

2021· preprint· en· W3172990156 on OpenAlexaff
Lucien Bissi da Freiria, ‪Joanis Tilemahos Zervoudakis, Nelcino Francisco de Paula, Mozart Alves Fonseca, Luciana Keiko Hatamoto-Zervoudakis, Pedro Ivo José Lopes da Rosa e Silva, Yasmim Rodrigues Vilas Boas e Silva, Adriano Jorge Possamai

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Square · 2021
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
Canadian institutionsCargill (Canada)
FundersCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
KeywordsGrazingProduction (economics)Environmental scienceAgronomyBiologyAnimal scienceEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We hypothesized that a decrease in flint corn particle size in the supplements of young bulls during grazing promotes better use of starch in the total gastrointestinal tract, with less starch lost in the feces, thus increasing growth performance. This experiment aimed to evaluate the effects of supplements with different ground corn particle sizes on the growth performance, economic analysis, intake and apparent digestibility of nutrients for beef cattle in Urochloa brizantha cv. Marandu pastures during the rainy-dry transition season. Sixty-four Nelore bulls, with an average age of 16 months and 303.6 ± 18.0 kg of body weight (BW), were distributed in a completely randomized design. The treatments were WG = whole grain (geometric mean particle size, dgw, 6.262 µm); CG = coarse ground grain (dgw, 2.882 µm); MG = medium ground grain (dgw, 1.011 µm); and FG = fine ground grain (dgw, 0.621 µm). The supplements with ground grain or whole grain were similar (P > 0.05) in terms of intake and the digestibility of dry matter (DM), forage, organic matter (OM), crude protein (CP), neutral detergent fiber corrected for ash and protein (NDFap), and total digestible nutrients (TDN). However, the starch digestion in the total tract was higher (P < 0.05) with ground grain than with whole grain. The different geometric mean particle sizes of the grain in the supplements were not sufficient to alter (P > 0.05) the starch digestion in the total tract. The starch fecal concentration decreased with ground grain compared with that for whole grain (P < 0.05). However, no differences in growth performance were observed among the treatments (P > 0.05). Supplementation with CG promoted a slightly greater net revenue (+ 11.51%) and return per ha (+ 12.8%) compared with WG, while MG and FG yielded worse economic results. Therefore, CG showed higher economic performance and efficiency utilization of starch, suggesting it is a better strategy for providing supplements to young grazing bulls.

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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

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 head0.084
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.263 · 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch Square→Same topicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology→French-language works237,207→