83 Canola fat supplementation for mid-late gestating beef cows and the effects on progeny backgrounding and finishing performance.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This study aimed to identify the optimal level of supplemental canola fat in gestating beef cow diets to enhance progeny performance during the backgrounding and finishing phases. Seventy-two Angus-cross, multiparous, pregnant beef cows were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 replicated (n=4) dietary treatments fed during mid-late gestation for 149 ± 3 d. Dietary treatments included control (CON), low fat (LF), and high fat (HF) supplemented with 0, 150, or 300 g of canola fat/head/day, respectively. Following parturition, cow-calf pairs were pastured, and progeny were later weaned and arrived to the feedlot at 175 ± 9 days of age. In yr 1 and 2, 63 and 65 progenies, respectively, were allocated into 1 of 6 pens/yr by sex and dam treatment. A similar backgrounding ration (14.4% CP; 67.7% TDN) was fed for 146 ± 2 d. To follow, a similar finishing ration (13.2% CP; 76.3% TDN) was fed for 114 ± 11 d including an initial 25 d transition period. Body weights (BW) were obtained over 2 d at start and end of each feeding phase and every 28 d. Data was analyzed in a complete randomized design with the mixed procedure of SAS (9.4). Progeny pen was the experimental unit, dam treatment was the fixed effect, and year was the random effect. During backgrounding phase for heifer progeny, there were no differences (P > 0.05) in initial shrunk BW (ISBW) (232 ± 25 kg), final shrunk BW (FSBW) (407 ± 34 kg), DMI (8.0 ± 0.2 kg/d) and gain to feed efficiency (GF) (0.150 ± 0.007). Increased supplemental fat in dam diets, linearly decreased (P=0.05) heifer background ADG in CON, LF, and HF treatments (1.25, 1.18, and 1.17 kg/d, respectively). In background phase for steer progeny, ISBW (236 ± 28 kg), FSBW (426 ± 39 kg), ADG (1.3 ± 0.1 kg/d), DMI (8.4 ± 0.3 kg/d), and GF (0.155 ± 0.002) did not differ (P > 0.05). In finishing phase for heifer progeny, there were no differences (P > 0.05) in FSBW (598 ± 43 kg), ADG (1.7 ± 0.2 kg/d), DMI (11.4 ± 0.4 kg/d), GF (0.145 ± 0.007), and post-weaning cumulative ADG (1.4 ± 0.1 kg/d). During finishing phase for steer progeny, FSBW (637 ± 40 kg), ADG (1.9 ± 0.2 kg/d), DMI (12.3 ± 0.4 kg/d), and post-weaning cumulative ADG (1.6 ± 0.1 kg/d) did not differ (P > 0.05). However, increased supplemental fat in dam diets caused a linear increase (P=0.03) of GF in finishing steer progeny in CON, LF, and HF treatments (0.144, 0.157, 0.159, respectively). These results of supplementing canola fat in mid-late gestating beef cow diets suggest reduced heifer progeny performance during background phase but improved steer performance during finishing phase.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".