MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388539654 · doi:10.1093/jas/skad281.742

PSXII-30 Changes in Ruminal Digesta and Ruminal Ammonia-N Concentration with Differing Durations Feed Restriction for Sheep

2023· article· en· W4388539654 on OpenAlexaff
Koryn S Hare, Koralie Lambert, Anne Clair Chagas, Daniel Hideki Mariano Watanabe, Greg B Penner

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Animal Science · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of SaskatchewanUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnimal scienceChemistryDigestion (alchemy)RumenBiologyFood scienceChromatographyFermentation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract During transient periods of feed restriction (FR), ruminal ammonia-N (NH3-N) concentrations and fluid volume may parallel the reduction in feed and water intake. However, changes in ruminal digesta characteristics and NH3-N during FR have not been characterized. Thus, the objective was to determine how FR duration impacts ruminal digesta weight and the liquid and solid fractions, and ruminal NH3-N concentration. Lambs (n = 9 wethers and 12 rams, stratified by BW and castration status) were fed ad libitum (AL, n = 7) or subjected to 5-d (FR5, n = 7) or 10-d of FR (FR10, n = 7) at 30% of AL intake. Lambs were killed 4 h post-feeding to excise the gastrointestinal tract and ruminal digesta was weighed. Sub-samples of digesta were collected for separation into solid and liquid fractions using a winepress, used for DM determination, and another was strained and preserved with sulfuric acid to analyze ruminal NH3-N concentration. Data were analyzed with PROC GLIMMIX (SAS 9.4) with the fixed effect of treatment and random effects of lamb specified to the R-sided matrix. Linear regression (PROC REG) was used to evaluate the relationship between ruminal NH3-N concentration and quantity relative to ruminal fluid weight and PROC CORR was used to generate Pearson correlation coefficients. The ruminal digesta weight did not differ (P = 0.97) among treatments but AL ruminal digesta was drier (P < 0.01) than FR5 and FR10 digesta (40.2% decrease in DM% relative to AL). As such, FR5 and FR10 had 0.7 ± 0.16 kg less (P = 0.01) ruminal solids than AL while they tended to have more (P = 0.09) ruminal fluid. Ruminal NH3-N concentration was greater (P < 0.01) for FR5 and FR10 compared with AL (2.4 and 2.0 vs. 0.4 ± 0.52 mg/dL, respectively). The quantity of ruminal NH3-N (mg) followed the same pattern with FR5 and FR10 having, on average, 51.5 ± 18.39 mg NH3-N more (P < 0.01) in their ruminal fluid than AL. The quantity of ruminal NH3-N was strongly correlated (ρ = 0.87, P < 0.01) to the total ruminal fluid such that 75% of the variance was explained by the relationship. The strength of the correlation (ρ = 0.81, R2 = 0.66, P < 0.01) between ruminal NH3-N concentration and total ruminal fluid was slightly lesser, but the two parameters were still strongly associated. From these data, we surmise that FR is associated with a reduction in ruminal DM content and may increase ruminal liquid that corresponds to increased ruminal NH3-N, independent of the duration of exposure.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.232 · 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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Animal ScienceSame topicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive PhysiologyFrench-language works237,207