Evaluation of National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM, 2021) feed evaluation model on predictions of milk protein yield on Québec commercial dairy farms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A recent study assessed the ability of 4 feed evaluation models to predict milk protein yield ( MPY ) under commercial context, with data from of 541 cows from 23 dairy herds in the province of Québec, Canada. However, the recently published Nutrient Requirements of Dairy Cattle from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine ( NASEM , 2021) was not released at that time. Thus, the current study evaluated NASEM using the same data set. To be consistent with the previous study, predicted DMI was used. Therefore, MPY was predicted using the 2 estimations of DMI proposed by NASEM: one based on animal characteristics only (DMI Ao ) and one also including ration characteristics (DMI A&R ). For each type of DMI estimates, 2 MPY predictions were made, using: 1) the multivariate equation directly published in NASEM and 2) a variable efficiency of utilization of MP predicted using inputs and outputs from NASEM, published a posteriori. With the 2 approaches, multivariate and variable efficiency, the DMI A&R yielded the best MPY predictions. The multivariate equation showed a regression bias between observed and predicted MPY with both DMI estimations. The estimated variable efficiency allowed for MPY predictions without mean and regression biases. With DMI A&R , concordance correlation coefficients (CCC) were 0.72 and 0.78 for MPY predicted using the multivariate and variable efficiency equations, respectively. In comparison, DMI Ao CCC were 0.60 and 0.71, respectively. In conclusion, on commercial farms, where dairy rations are usually optimized for a group of cows, estimates of DMI based on animal and rations characteristics yielded the best MPY predictions. The multivariate equation from NASEM predicted MPY with a regression bias whereas the variable efficiency of utilization of MP based on MP and energy supplies resulted in no bias in MPY predictions.
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 | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".