MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4402533293 · doi:10.1093/jas/skae234.216

221 Multivariate statistics as a quick tool to screen perennial forages for forage value

2024· article· en· W4402533293 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Blasius N Azuhnwi, Akim Omokanye

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Animal Science · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic and phenotypic traits in livestock
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsForagePerennial plantMultivariate statisticsStatisticsValue (mathematics)AgronomyBiologyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Perennial forages seeded as straight grasses and legumes or in mixtures make a valuable contribution as feed for the beef cattle industry in Alberta. With new varieties constantly being released, there is need to quickly screen these for their forage value. Principal component analysis (PCA) is a multivariate analysis which can simplify a large dataset by identifying and representing patterns in fewer dimensions or factors. In total, 23 and 20 perennial straight grass and legume varieties respectively, and 15 commercial mixes were seeded as a complete randomized block design on small plots with 4 replicates on May 31, 2021 at Debolt, Alberta. Plots were harvested on July 12 and September 15, 2022 as first and second cut, respectively. The harvested biomass was weighed, and a sub-sample was air-dried to determine forage dry matter (DM). Dried forage samples were submitted for various forage quality analyses. A PCA was conducted on the correlation matrix of the data set of forage DM yield and quality. The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) measure and Bartlett’s test of sphericity verified the sampling adequacy (KMO = 0.71 and P > 0.001 respectively) for the analysis. The first three principal components (PC) had eigenvalues over Kaiser’s criterion of 1 and in combination explained 81 % of the variance (Table 1). Most of the legumes were greater in crude protein, yielded greater in forage DM, macro minerals (Ca, Mg and P) and micro minerals (Zn, Fe and Cu) compared with grasses and mixtures (Figure 1). Among the legumes, the following alfalfa varieties exhibited high forage value (i.e. combined both forage yield and quality): Peace Alfalfa, PV Ultima Alfalfa, Alfalfa Dalton, Algonquin, AC Yellow Head, Trueman Alfalfa. Noteworthy are the 3 non-alfalfa species (birdsfoot trefoil, sainfoin and cicer milkvetch) which loaded on the opposite quadrant to most of the alfalfa varieties. The grass varieties were more dispersed on the multivariate space of the first two PC thus exhibiting the inherent variability in forage value of the grass collection. A few grass species nonetheless distinguished themselves in terms of greater forage yield and quality and include AC Saltlander, Richard Timothy, Rocky Mountain Fescue and Hybrid Bromegrass. Most of the grasses were high in fiber and loaded primarily opposite to the positive forage value attributes. The mixtures loaded similarly to the grasses with a couple loading close to the legumes but most close to the grasses, revealing their high fiber content. The mixtures which loaded close to the legumes were legume-dominated mixtures such as Alfalfa/Sainfoin Mix, All LegumeMix, HayMix and LegumeMaster Mix which had between 90 to 100% legumes. PCA proved to be a useful tool in distinguishing treatments with high forage value as these corresponded with widely used varieties in Alberta. Tables and Figures 2.pdf

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.086

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0070.006
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0260.004

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.299 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Animal Science→Same topicGenetic and phenotypic traits in livestock→French-language works237,207→