312 Effects of Bismuth Subsalicylate and Different Sulfate Concentrations on in vitro Ruminal Fermentation Using a Warm-season Perennial Hay Substrate
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract A randomized complete block design was used to evaluate the effects of bismuth subsalicylate (BSS) on in vitro ruminal fermentation with differing concentrations of sulfate. In vitro fermentation consisted of 50 mL of a 4:1 buffer:ruminal fluid inoculum and 0.7 g (pre-dehydrated) of substrate [WW-B Dahl bluestem hay (Bothriochloa bladhii)] incubated for 48 h (39oC). Treatments were arranged as a 3 × 4 factorial with concentration of sulfate (0.2, 2.9, or 5.6 g sulfate/L buffer) and BSS (0.0, 0.165, 0.330, or 0.495% substrate DM) as the main factors. In vitro organic matter digestibility (IVOMD), and CH4, H2S, and total gas production (TGP) were measured. Data were analyzed using the MIXED procedure of SAS with the fixed effects of BSS, sulfate, and their interaction. Incubation day (block) was considered a random effect. The average of 2 bottles within day was considered experimental unit. A BSS × sulfate interaction was observed for TGP (P = 0.040) and H2S production (P < 0.001), where BSS had a larger negative impact on TGP and production of H2S with greater concentrations of sulfate. A linear effect (P < 0.001) of sulfate was observed for CH4 production per gram of incubated OM, where CH4 was decreased as sulfate concentration increased. A quadratic effect of sulfate was observed for IVOMD (P = 0.010) and pH (P = 0.009). Production of H2S linearly decreased (P = 0.001) as BSS concentration increased. The addition of BSS to in vitro incubations did not affect (P > 0.10) any other variables measured. Bismuth subsalicylate does not appear to have negative effects on in vitro fermentation parameters while decreasing H2S production; however, elevated concentrations of sulfate in the buffer appears to have negative impacts on fermentation. Further in vivo research is warranted to support BSS supplementation to cattle with high dietary sulfate.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".