Milk Quality and Prolactin Hormone Levels of Murrah Buffalo Fed with Local Forage and Urea Molasses Block at Kapau Village Agam Regency West Sumatra
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Feeding is one of the main factors in the success of a Murrah buffalo farming business. Good quality feed will increase Murrah buffalo's productivity, including the quality of milk produced. Buffalo (Bubalus bubalis) milk has the advantage of 6-8% fat and 3-8% protein compared to 3-4% fat and protein content in cow's (Bos taurus) milk. This study aims to improve milk quality and prolactin hormone levels in Murrah buffaloes by providing local forage-based feed and urea molasses block. This research is an experimental study with a Latin Square Design (LSD), using four female Murrah buffaloes as the research sample with the following feeding: P1 = basal feed (10% of body weight); P2 = 30% sweet potato leaves + 30% cassava leaves + 40% P1 + urea molasses block; P3 = 40% sweet potato leaves + 40% cassava leaves + 20% P1 + urea molasses block; P4 = 50% sweet potato leaves + 50% cassava leaves + urea molasses block. The parameters measured in this study were protein, amino acids, fat, milk fatty acids, and Murrah buffalo Prolactin Hormone levels. The results obtained in the study in order are as follows: protein (2.37-3.83%); amino acids (2.54-8.45%w/w); fat (5.86-9.22%); prolactin (1.61-1.99ng/ml). The results showed that feeding 50% sweet potato leaves, 50% cassava leaves, and urea molasses block can improve milk quality and prolactin hormone levels in Murrah buffaloes.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it