MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412133280 · doi:10.1093/jas/skaf219

Determination of relative bioavailability from copper carbonate (Emerald-C) and tribasic copper chloride in growing beef steers

2025· article· en· W4412133280 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jacob A Henderson, Stephanie L Hansen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Animal Science · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMeat and Animal Product Quality
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCopperBioavailabilityChemistryCarbonateEmeraldChlorideBeef cattleEnvironmental chemistryInorganic chemistryAnimal scienceMineralogyBiologyOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Two experiments were conducted to determine the bioavailability of Cu carbonate (CuCO3) and tribasic Cu chloride (TBCC) relative to Cu sulfate (CuSO4). Experiment 1 utilized 84 steers (282 ± 19 kg) in a 96-d study stratified by weight into pens (six steers per pen) equipped with GrowSafe feed bunks (GrowSafe Systems Ltd, Airdire, AB, Canada). Two pens (n = 12 steers per treatment) were randomly assigned to one of seven treatments: no supplemental Cu (CON), 5 or 10 mg Cu/kg diet dry matter (DM) from CuCO3 (CO5 and CO10, respectively), 5 or 10 mg Cu/kg diet DM from CuSO4 (SUL5 and SUL10, respectively), and 5 or 10 mg Cu/kg diet DM from TBCC (TBCC5 and TBCC10, respectively). All animals were supplemented with 2 mg Mo/kg diet DM and 0.1% S. Blood and liver samples were collected on days 5 and 4 and on days 95 and 96 with treatments stratified across sampling days. Weight was measured on days -1, 0, 26, 56, 93, and 94. Liver samples were used to determine liver Cu concentration and expression of genes relating to Cu trafficking. Blood samples were used to determine plasma Cu and ceruloplasmin concentrations. Markers of Cu status were used to determine the relative bioavailability (RBV) of each test source against CuSO4. Based on liver Cu, CuCO3, and TBCC were not as bioavailable as CuSO4 (89% and 88%, respectively, P < 0.01). There were no differences in RBV between sources based on plasma Cu; however, based on ceruloplasmin, CuCO3 tended to be more bioavailable than CuSO4 (186%; P = 0.08). Experiment 2 compared rates of repletion of Cu-depleted steers fed each source at 5 mg Cu/kg DM (plus 5 mg Mo/kg DM) for 21 d. Controls had the lowest liver Cu following depletion (P ≤ 0.01), while Cu-supplemented treatments were not different (P ≥ 0.40). Plasma Cu was affected by day (P < 0.01), where days 7 and 14 of repletion were similar (P = 0.23) and greater than day 21 (P ≤ 0.01). There was a tendency for a treatment × day interaction where ceruloplasmin tended to be greater on day 14 than on day 7 (P ≤ 0.09), while CON remained consistent on days 7 and 14 (P = 0.51), and decreased from day 14 to day 21 (P = 0.03). Environmental factors and initial Cu status may have impacted the outcome of Exp. 2. In conclusion, Cu from CuCO3 tended to result in more Cu in circulation as ceruloplasmin than CuSO4 and TBCC.

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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.275
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Animal ScienceSame topicMeat and Animal Product QualityFrench-language works237,207