MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387213252 · doi:10.3389/frmbi.2023.1212255

Ruminal bacterial communities differ in early-lactation dairy cows with differing risk of ruminal acidosis

2023· article· en· W4387213252 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Microbiomes · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyRumenAcidosisAnimal scienceDairy cattleTotal mixed rationNutrientLactationFood scienceEcologyEndocrinologyIce calvingFermentation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: = 261) from 32 herds in three regions (Australia, California, and Canada) were previously categorized using a discriminant analysis model as being at a high (26.1% of cows), medium (26.8% of cows), or low risk (47.1% of cows) of ruminal acidosis. We aimed to investigate if (1) risk of acidosis would be associated with ruminal bacterial taxa and dietary nutrient components, (2) there would be individual or combinations of bacterial taxa associated with acidosis-risk groups, and (3) the abundance of bacterial taxa would be associated with the intake of dietary nutrient components. Methods: Diets ranged from pasture supplemented with concentrates to total mixed rations. Bacteria 16S ribosomal DNA sequences from rumen samples collected < 3 hours after feeding via stomach tube were analyzed to determine bacterial presence. The relative abundance of each bacterial phylum and family was center log transformed and the transformed family data were subjected to two redundancy analysis biplots, one for acidosis risk group and one for region, to identify the 20 best-fit bacterial families from each respective redundancy analysis. A total of 29 unique families were identified when the lists of 20 families were combined from each redundancy analysis, and these 29 families were termed "influential" families." The association of acidosis-risk groups with the abundance of individual influential families was assessed by mixed models. Backward stepwise elimination mixed models were used to determine the bacterial taxa associated with each acidosis-risk group and the dietary nutrients associated with the abundance of the bacterial taxa. Results and discussion: High-risk acidosis cows were associated with increased abundances of Anaerocella_f and Veillonellaceae and decreased abundances of several bacterial families with different characteristics. Five phyla: Firmicutes [odds ratio (OR) = 7.47 ± 7.43], Spirochaetes (OR = 1.28 ± 0.14), Lentisphaerae (OR = 0.70 ± 0.07), Planctomycetes (OR = 0.70 ± 0.09), and Tenericutes (OR = 0.44 ± 0.15), and nine families were associated with a higher risk of acidosis. Of the nine phyla identified to be of interest based on abundance and strength of association with acidosis-risk groups, all had one or more dietary nutrient that predicted their abundance. Sugar was the most frequently associated nutrient with the nine phyla, and was present in 78% (seven out of nine phyla) of the models; crude protein was present in 56% of models and crude fat was present in 44% of the models. Sugar and crude protein were most associated with the influential families and all but three families had one or more nutrient predictive of their abundance. Ruminal bacterial taxa are associated with ruminal acidosis; dietary sugar and crude protein are vital predictors of these and, thus, of ruminal acidosis risk.

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)0.000
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.388
Threshold uncertainty score0.279

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.202
Teacher spread0.190 · 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