Ruminal degradation and intestinal digestion of developed oat (<i>Avena sativa</i> L.) varieties in comparison with barley grain in dairy cows
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aimed to evaluate the ruminal degradation and intestinal digestion of nutrients of two cultivars of oat grains (CDC Nasser and CDC Seabiscuit) in comparison with a barley grain (CDC Meredith that was considered the control treatment) in dairy cows. Nasser showed higher rumen undegradable protein (RUP; P < 0.01) and intestinal digestible protein ( P < 0.01) than Seabiscuit or control. However, the total digestible protein was not different among grain varieties ( P = 0.25). The in vitro intestinal digestibility of RUP (dIBP) for Nasser was higher than control ( P = 0.02); however, the dIBP in Seabiscuit did not differ from other cultivars. The intestinal digestible rumen bypass starch and total digestible starch were lower in the oat grain varieties than in the control ( P < 0.01). The truly absorbed protein supplied to the small intestine (DVE) was highest for control, intermediate for Seabiscuit, and lowest for Nasser ( P < 0.01). Moreover, control showed a higher estimated feed milk value than oat varieties ( P < 0.01). In conclusion, Seabiscuit shared similar rumen degradation and intestinal digestibility with control suggesting that Seabiscuit oat grain could in some extension replace barley grain in diets for dairy cows.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".