Effect of modifying energy to protein ratio of alfalfa on ruminal fermentation, nitrogen use, methane production, and microbial composition in vitro
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Effects of contrasted energy to protein ratios in alfalfa on in vitro rumen degradation characteristics and microbial composition were evaluated. Thirty-six alfalfa forages categorized as either superior (2.0) non-fiber carbohydrates (NFC) to crude protein (CP) ratio (NFC/CP; Ratio +; n = 18) or inferior (0.9) NFC/CP ratio (Ratio –; n = 18) were compared using a batch-culture in vitro technique. Forages were similar in their neutral detergent fiber concentrations (340 g/kg). Statistical analysis model considered treatment (Ratio + and Ratio –) as fixed effect while incubation run was a random effect, with significant treatment effect declared at P ≤ 0.05. After 24 h of incubation, apparent degradability of dry matter (DM; 57 vs. 53%), total gas production (263 vs. 228 mL) and total volatile fatty acids concentration (VFA; 48 vs. 42 mM) in ruminal fluid were greater for Ratio + than Ratio – alfalfa. Microbial N use efficiency (69 vs. 56 g of microbial N/100 g of N incubated) was greater with Ratio + than Ratio –, which was associated with an increase in ammonia-utilizing bacteria in the Ratio +. This work highlights the potential to reduce the environmental footprint of ruminants through forage management and plant breeding.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".