Effects of medium-chain fatty acid supplementation on performance and rumen fermentation of lactating Holstein dairy cows
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Medium-chain fatty acids (MCFAs) have antimicrobial properties and cause negative or positive effects on animal performance depending on its dosage. We hypothesized that MCFA supplementation at a lower dose (i.e., 0.05-0.2% of dietary DM) would increase rumen pH and milk production without decreasing nutrient digestibility which is typically observed with the higher inclusion rates (i.e., >1% of dietary DM). The objective of this study was to evaluate the effects of MCFA supplementation at a lower dose on productivity, plasma energy metabolite concentrations, apparent total tract nutrient digestibility, rumen fermentation, and rumen microbial profile of lactating dairy cows. Thirty (n = 8 primiparous, n = 22 multiparous) Holstein cows in mid-lactation (637 ± 68.5 kg of initial BW, 98.5 ± 27.4 d in milk; mean ± standard deviation) were used in a crossover design with two 28-d periods. The MCFA supplement, consisted of 25% MCFA (containing 32% C8:0, 21% C10:0, 47% C12:0 on DM basis) and 75% carrier ingredients, was fed at 0.25% of dietary DM replacing dry ground corn in control (CON). Total inclusion of MCFA was 0.063% of dietary DM. No differences were observed in DM intake, apparent total tract nutrient digestibility and BW change between MCFA and CON. Milk and milk component yields did not differ between treatment groups. The MCFA supplementation tended to have higher minimum rumen pH (5.66 vs. 5.54), and decreased daily fluctuation range of rumen pH (1.17 vs. 1.40) compared to CON. However, the duration of acidosis (pH < 5.8, min/d) did not differ between treatment groups and ruminal total volatile fatty acid concentration and its profile did not differ between treatment groups. For rumen microbiota, the Chao1 index of bacterial community tended to be lower (10.9 vs. 11.6) whereas the Shannon index did not differ (0.91 vs. 0.93) in MCFA compared to CON, and both indices did not differ for archaeal and protozoan communities between treatment groups. The relative abundance of Methanobrevibacter gottschalkii increased when supplemented with MCFA (5.14 vs. 4.92%). These results suggest that supplementation of MCFA at 0.063% dietary DM may not affect overall animal performance or total tract nutrient digestibility, but decrease the daily range of pH and the bacterial richness in the rumen.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".