MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4323838384 · doi:10.1093/tas/txad028

Supplement feed efficiency of growing beef cattle grazing native<i>Campos</i>grasslands during winter: a collated analysis

2023· article· en· W4323838384 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueTranslational Animal Science · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicEffects of Environmental Stressors on Livestock
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Prince Edward Island
FundersInstituto Nacional de Investigacion Agropecuaria, UruguayUniversidad de la República UruguayInstituto Nacional de Investigación y Tecnología Agraria y Alimentaria
KeywordsGrazingAnimal scienceBeef cattleDry matterGrasslandBiologySubtropicsPastureAgronomyBody weightEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Supplementing growing cattle grazing native subtropical Campos grasslands during winter improves the low, even negative, average daily weight gain (ADG) typical of extensive animal production systems in Uruguay. Nonetheless, to render the practice profitable, it is crucial to control supplement feed efficiency (SFE), that is, the difference in ADG between supplemented and control animals (ADGchng) per unit of supplement dry matter (DM) intake. Little has been studied specifically on how SFE varies in these systems. The objective of this study was to quantify the magnitude and variation in SFE of growing beef cattle grazing stockpiled native Campos grasslands during winter and assess putative associations with herbage, animals, supplements, and climatic variables. We compiled data from supplementation trials carried out in Uruguay between 1993 and 2018, each evaluating between one and six supplementation treatments. The average ADG of unsupplemented and supplemented animals were 0.13 ± 0.174 and 0.49 ± 0.220 kg/animal/day, respectively. In both cases, ADG decreased linearly as the proportion of green herbage in the grazed grassland was lower, but the ADG of unsupplemented animals was further reduced when winter frosts were numerous. Estimated SFE were moderately high, with an average of 0.21 ± 0.076 ADGchng/kg DM, resulting from average ADGchng of 0.38 ± 0.180 kg/animal/day in response to an average supplementation rate of 1.84 ± 0.68 kg supplement DM intake/animal/day (0.86% ± 0.27% body weight). No association was found between SFE and supplementation rate or type (protein vs. energy-based; P &amp;gt; 0.05), but forage allowance negatively affected it, and herbage mass positively affected it, yet in a smaller magnitude, suggesting that a balance is needed between the two to maximize SFE. Weather conditions during trials affected SFE (P &amp;lt; 0.05), with greater SFE in winters with lower temperatures and more frosts. Daytime grazing time was consistently lower in supplemented animals compared to their unsupplemented counterparts, whereas ruminating time during the day was similar, increasing as the proportion of green herbage decreased. Herbage intake estimated from energy balance suggested the existence of some substitution effect. This agrees with the moderately high SFE and with the total digestible nutrients-to-protein ratio of these subtropical humid grasslands being higher than in semi-arid rangelands and dry-season tropical pastures but lower than in sown pastures.

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.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.740
Threshold uncertainty score0.399

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.228 · 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