The effect of a sugarcane polyphenol extract on intake, apparent total tract digestibility, rumen fermentation, pH, methane emissions, and the rumen microbiome of beef heifers fed a high forage diet
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Eight ruminally cannulated Angus cross heifers (518 ± 33.4 kg) were used in a replicated 4 × 4 Latin square to examine the impact of a sugarcane polyphenol extract (SPE) on feed intake, rumen fermentation, apparent total tract digestibility, methane (CH 4 ) production, and the rumen microbiome. Heifers were offered a corn silage-based diet with either 0%, 0.3%, 0.6%, or 1.2% of SPE replacing barley grain. Rumen fluid was analysed for volatile fatty acids, protozoa counts, and bacterial diversity. Rumen pH data loggers were used for continuous measurement of ruminal pH and heifers were housed individually to measure apparent total tract digestibility. Cattle were placed into respiration chambers to measure CH 4 production. Data were analysed using the mixed model procedure of SAS with the fixed effect of treatment, and the random effects of block, heifer nested within block, and period. Supplementation of SPE increased absolute ruminal pH ( P ≤ 0.01) and its variability ( P = 0.05); however, there was no impact on intake, rumen fermentation or bacterial diversity ( P ≥ 0.11). The results of this study suggest that SPE does not influence CH 4 production in heifers fed high-forage diets.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".