MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3177629850 · doi:10.1016/j.animal.2021.100304

Association between fecal methanogen species with methane production and grazed forage intake of beef heifers classified for residual feed intake under drylot conditions

2021· article· en· W3177629850 on OpenAlexafffund
Ghader Manafiazar, Carolyn Fitzsimmons, Mi Zhou, J. A. Basarab, V. S. Baron, Lisa McKeown, Le Luo Guan

Bibliographic record

Venueanimal · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaUniversity of Alberta
FundersAlberta Livestock and Meat AgencyEmissions Reduction AlbertaAlberta Agriculture and ForestryClimate Change and Emissions Management Corporation
KeywordsMethanogenBeef cattleResidual feed intakeAnimal scienceFecesBiologyPastureGrazingPopulationForageAgronomyEnvironmental scienceFeed conversion ratioMethaneEcologyBody weight

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reduction in greenhouse gas emission from beef production is essential to the survival of the beef industry from environmental and social-economic perspectives. There are different systems available to measure methane from animals, but they are expensive, not easily accessible, and not suitable for large-scale methane measurements on the farm. Therefore exploring indicator traits, which are easy to measure, cost-effective, and suitable for large-scale measurement, are recommended. The objectives of this study were to examine the diversity of fecal methanogen profile among efficient and inefficient beef heifers on pasture and investigate methanogen profile as a possible proxy to predict methane emission in beef cattle consuming a forage diet. Forty pregnant (1st trimester) heifers previously classified for postweaning residual feed intake adjusted for off-test back fat (RFIfat; 20 high and 20 low) were included in this study. To determine individual pasture grazing intake, heifers were dosed with 1 kg of C32 labeled pellets once per day from Day 0 to Day 12, and fecal samples were collected twice daily from Day 8 to Day 15. Fecal samples from Days 8, 10, and 12 were analyzed for their methanogen profile. Animals were monitored individually for methane and carbon dioxide production using a GreenFeed Emissions Monitoring system. Total methanogen population and methanogenic community diversity of fecal samples were not different (P > 0.1) between low and high RFIfat groups, as measured by quantitative PCR and α- and β-diversity indices. However, both groups had a different methanogen profile; the relative abundance of Methanobrevibacter wolinii and relatives were higher (P < 0.002), while that of Methanosphaera species ISO3-F5 was lower (P < 0.01) in low RFIfat cattle compared to the high RFIfat group. We also demonstrated that fecal methanogen profiles may be a useful proxy in predicting daily methane and carbon dioxide emissions with an adjusted R2 of 0.53 and 0.33, respectively, for low RFIfat heifers and 0.46 and 0.57, respectively, for the high RFIfat group.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.752
Threshold uncertainty score0.215

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations8
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueanimalSame topicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive PhysiologyFrench-language works237,207