MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3189639941 · doi:10.3168/jds.2021-20466

Method of diet delivery to dairy cows: Effects on nutrient digestion, rumen fermentation, methane emissions from enteric fermentation and stored manure, nitrogen excretion, and milk production

2021· article· en· W3189639941 on OpenAlexafffund
C. Benchaar, F. Hassanat

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Dairy Science · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
FundersAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
KeywordsTotal mixed rationRumenPropionateDry matterDigestion (alchemy)ChemistryFermentationNeutral Detergent FiberManureFood scienceAnimal scienceDistillers grainsExcretionNutrientDairy cattleForageAgronomyBiologyLactationIce calvingBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study was conducted to examine the effect of method of diet delivery to dairy cows on enteric CH 4 emission, milk production, rumen fermentation, nutrient digestion, N excretion, and manure CH 4 production potential. Sixteen lactating cows were used in a crossover design (35-d period) and fed ad libitum twice daily a diet [52:48, forage:concentrate ratio; dry matter (DM) basis] provided as forages and concentrates separately (CF) or as a total mixed ration (TMR). For the CF treatment, concentrates were offered first followed by mixed forages 45 min afterward. Method of diet delivery had no effect on DM intake, but neutral detergent fiber (NDF) intake was greater when the diet was delivered as TMR as compared with CF. Apparent total-tract digestibility of DM, crude protein, and gross energy was slightly (1 percentage unit) lower when the diet was offered as TMR than when offered as CF. In contrast, NDF digestibility was greater when the cows were fed TMR versus CF. Although average daily ruminal pH was not affected by method of diet delivery, daily duration of ruminal pH <5.6 was less when the diet was delivered as TMR as compared with CF (0.9 h/d versus 3.7 h/d). Delivering the diet as TMR increased ruminal total volatile fatty acid and NH 3 concentrations, but had no effect on acetate, propionate, or branched-chain volatile fatty acid molar proportions. Yields of milk, milk fat, or milk protein, and milk production efficiency (kg of milk/kg of DM intake or g of N milk/g of N intake) were not affected by the method of diet delivery. Daily production (g/d), yield (% gross energy intake), and emission intensity (g/kg of energy-corrected milk) of enteric CH 4 averaged 420 g/d, 4.9%, and 9.6 g/kg and were not affected by diet delivery method. Fecal N output was greater when the diet was delivered as TMR versus CF, whereas urinary N excretion (g/d, % N intake) was not affected. Manure volatile solids excretion and maximal CH 4 production potential were not affected by method of diet delivery. Under the conditions of this study, delivering the diet as concentrates and forages separately versus a total mixed ration had no effect on milk production, enteric CH 4 energy losses, urinary N, or maximal manure CH 4 emission potential. However, feeding the diet as total mixed ration compared with feeding concentrates and forages separately attenuated the extent of postprandial decrease in ruminal pH, which has contributed to improving NDF digestibility.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.258 · 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

Citations7
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Dairy Science→Same topicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology→French-language works237,207→