MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402961022 · doi:10.1186/s43170-024-00287-2

An evaluation of a Browse-aid at the doorsteps of (agro)pastoralists to improve consumption of in situ browses and shrubs and prevent animal deaths during droughts

2024· article· en· W4402961022 on OpenAlexfundno aff
H.P.S. Makkar, Abay Bekele, Yosef Seyoum Mulugeta, Andinet Adamu, Redwan Getachew Asfaw, Wesinew Adugna Bekele, Abdinur Ali Warfa, Degefa Wayessa, Merkeb Belay, Genene Regassa

Bibliographic record

VenueCABI Agriculture and Bioscience · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMastercard Foundation
KeywordsPastoralismConsumption (sociology)In situAgroforestryGeographyEnvironmental scienceLivestockForestrySociologySocial scienceMeteorology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Thousands of animals die in Ethiopia during droughts due to unavailability of feed. Large amounts of browses are available during droughts, which animals do not consume because of the presence of tannins. The hypothesis of the study was that the provision of small amounts of Browse-aid (polyethylene glycol-4000) to animals at farmers’ doorsteps would increase browse consumption and body weight gain, and prevent deaths during droughts. Methods A field study was conducted at two sites in Ethiopia to assess the dietary inclusion of the Browse-aid (daily 5 g and 10 g for shoats; and 15 g and 30 g for cattle) to farmers’ sheep, goats and cattle in areas devoid of grasses during a very dry spell. Results Inclusion of the Browse-aid to sheep and goats significantly increased the percent body weight gain, and improved the body condition score, skin coat appearance and shine in eyes when compared with those of animals not given the Browse-aid. Similar results were observed in cattle. The foraging frequency of the animals also increased. Nutrient availability to the animals from the increased consumption of browses also increased. Furthermore, the body condition scores of the animals given the Browse-aid were greater than those of the animals that did not participate in the trial but were grazing in the same area. Conclusion Browse-aid made a positive impact on the production of animals during periods of severe feed scarcity. This strategy of providing the Browse-aid (daily 5 g for sheep and goats, and 15 g for cattle) to animals during droughts is highly cost effective; additionally, compared with currently used feeding strategies, the cost in late 2023 was 60% and 90% lower for sheep and goats, and cattle respectively to prevent animals from dying during droughts. A large number of animals can be prevented from dying during droughts, at a much-reduced cost by the dietary inclusion of a small amount of the Browse-aid. The implications of the study are not restricted to Ethiopia but extend to countries in the Horn of Africa. This is the first study that has investigated the effect of the Browse-aid at the farmers’ doorsteps in the field.

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 venueCABI Agriculture and BioscienceSame topicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive PhysiologyFrench-language works237,207