MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4388539511 · doi:10.1093/jas/skad281.166

224 Effects of Feeding Hybrid Rye Grain as a Replacement for Barley Grain on Feed Intake, Ruminal Fermentation, and Site of Nutrient Digestion for Finishing Beef Cattle

2023· article· en· W4388539511 on OpenAlexaff
Fuquan Zhang, Rebecca S Brattain, Rachel E Carey, Herman Wehrle, Greg B Penner

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Animal Science · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLatin squareSecaleDigestion (alchemy)Dry matterBeef cattleAgronomyPropionateHayAnimal scienceChemistryFood scienceNutrientFermentationBiologyRumenBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The objective of this study was to evaluate effects of increasing hybrid rye as a replacement for barley grain on feed intake, ruminal fermentation, and site of nutrient digestion in finishing cattle. Eight ruminally and duodenally cannulated Hereford-cross heifers (starting body weight = 514 ± 25.3 kg) were used in a replicated 4×4 Latin square design with 21-d periods including 15 d of dietary adaptation and 6 d of sample collection. Dietary treatments included a control diet with 10.0% hay, 85.2% barley grain, and 4.8% of a vitamin and mineral supplement on a dry matter (DM) basis. Hybrid rye grain replaced 33, 67, or 100% of the barley grain. Both cereal grains were dry rolled to 80% processing index. Feed, refusals, ruminal fluid, duodenal digesta, and fecal samples were collected. Data were analyzed using the MIXED procedure of SAS 9.4 (SAS Inst. Inc., Cary, NC). Increasing hybrid rye inclusion tended (P = 0.052) to linearly decrease DM intake. Additionally, increasing hybrid rye grain linearly decreased mean and minimum ruminal pH (P < 0.01) and increased the duration (P < 0.01) and area (P = 0.01) that pH was less than 5.5. There was no effect of hybrid rye inclusion on total short chain fatty acid, lactic acid concentrations, or osmolality. Likewise, the molar proportion of acetate and butyrate were not affected by hybrid rye inclusion. Propionate tended to linearly increase with increasing hybrid rye inclusion (P = 0.08). Increasing hybrid rye linearly increased NH3-N concentration (P = 0.03). Ruminal organic matter (OM) digestibility tended to linearly increase (P = 0.08) and ash-free neutral detergent fiber (aNDFom) digestibility linearly increased (P < 0.01) when increasing hybrid rye. There was no effect on ruminal starch digestibility (71.1 ± 5.12%). Intestinal digestibility of CP linearly decreased (P = 0.050), but there were no effects for other nutrients. Increasing hybrid rye linearly increased apparent total-tract DM, OM, and aNDFom digestibility (P < 0.05) but did not affect starch digestibility (97.4 ± 0.42%). Increasing the inclusion rate of hybrid rye grain at the expense of barley grain in finishing diets may decrease DMI and increase risk for ruminal acidosis; however, hybrid rye inclusion did not influence the site or extent of starch digestion and increased total tract digestibility of DM, OM, and aNDFom.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Animal Science→Same topicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology→French-language works237,207→