MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4296617840 · doi:10.1093/jas/skac247.060

65 The Role of Livestock as up-Cyclers of Food by-Products and Waste

2022· article· en· W4296617840 on OpenAlexaffabout
Kim Ominski, Tim A. McAllister, Kim Stanford, Genet Mengistu, Kebebe E Gunte, Marcos Marcos, K. M. Wittenberg, Faith A. Omonijo, Jaime White, Getahun Legesse

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Animal Science · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAgriculture Sustainability and Environmental Impact
Canadian institutionsUniversity of LethbridgeAgriculture Food and Rural DevelopmentMcGill UniversityAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFood wasteBusinessLivestockFood securitySustainabilityIncentiveWhole foodQuality (philosophy)Food systemsInvestment (military)Natural resource economicsBiodegradable wasteFood safetyAgricultureWaste managementEconomicsEngineeringFood science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Food waste is a global dilemma with environmental, social and economic consequences. Environmental impacts of wasted food are substantial as it comprises the single largest category of organic matter in municipal landfills. Therefore, redirection of food waste from landfills is necessary to improve global food security and environmental sustainability issues. Livestock, with their capacity to “up-cycle” relatively low-quality feedstuffs into high quality protein, are an essential element of this solution. However, challenges regarding utilization of food waste for livestock production include regulatory restrictions, safety concerns and logistics associated with collection, transport and handling. Moreover, identifying industries with significant loss and waste resources along the supply chain, quantifying availability, and effective communication and coordination are necessary steps for large-scale diversion of food loss and waste to livestock feed. In Canada, Loop Resources is a one-of-a-kind organization that enables food wholesalers, retailers, and producers to divert unsaleable food away from landfill to local food banks and livestock farmers. They are working with retailers to divert 2.5 – 3.5 million kg of food waste/month to over 2500 farms across Canada. However, today’s diversity of by-products and urban setting for much of our food waste requires a diversity of solutions. Producer and processor incentives to recover more food will require investment to improve infrastructure and create market opportunities. Research to facilitate safe incorporation of food waste in animal feed is also a critical step toward changes in policy and regulation. In addition, comprehensive LCA-type assessments will shed light on the environmental benefits of replacing feed grains or forages with by-products or food waste. Finally, a coordinated approach requiring input from producers, food processors, feed suppliers, researchers, policy makers and retailers, is critical for the development of successful strategies for inclusion of food loss and waste in livestock diets.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.055

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.197 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Animal ScienceSame topicAgriculture Sustainability and Environmental ImpactFrench-language works237,207