Effects of 3-day versus 9-day whole-plant corn allocation and hay supplementation on performance, grazing preference, and ruminal fermentation of beef cows
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study was designed to evaluate the effects of a 3-d vs. 9-d whole-plant corn allocation period and hay supplementation on performance, grazing prefer- ence, and ruminal fermentation of beef cows. Whole-plant corn grazing with beef cows was managed during the winters of 2015 to 2016 (yr 1) and 2016 to 2017 (yr 2). Ninety-six Angus- based crossbred cows, including an additional 16 ruminal- ly cannulated cows for a total of 112 head, were allocated in 4 replicated systems for 84 and 88 d in yr 1 and 2, respectively. A completely randomized block design with a 2 × 2 factorial arrangement of treatments was used: hay supplement or no hay supplement, with 3-d or 9-d alloca- tion period of corn forage. Cow body weight, average daily gain, body condition score, rib fat, and rump fat were not affected by supplemental hay, allocation period, or their interaction. Cows fed no hay had greater corn intake than cows fed hay. Supplemental hay resulted in decreased grazing preference for stem, husk, and leaf. Al- location period affected grazing preference for husk. Mean ruminal pH, maximum pH, and duration and area (pH × min) that ruminal pH was <5.5 were not affected by supplemental hay, allocation period, or their interaction. Total short-chain fatty acid concentrations and molar pro- portions of acetate, butyrate, isobutyrate, and valerate and ammonia concentration were not affected by treat- ment. However, supplemental hay decreased the molar proportion of proprionate compared with that of cows not provided supplemental hay. An interaction was observed where cows fed no supplemental hay and cows with a 9-d allocation period had a greater molar proportion of isova- lerate compared with cows fed hay and cows with a 3-d allocation period, respectively. Cow performance was not affected by hay supplementation nor allocation period. However, hay supplementation mitigated low ru- men pH risk and fecal starch loss and may reduce the risk of acidosis when grazing whole-plant corn with beef cows.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".