MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6996748604

Strategic supplementation to improve beef cattle performance and expand utilization of pasture-based production systems

2023· dissertation· en· W6996748604 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueMspace (University of Manitoba) · 2023
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReligion, Spirituality, and Psychology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsForageBeef cattleGrazingDry matterCattle feedingPerennial plant
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This project was conducted to examine the effects of supplement intake and variation when delivered using a precision feeding system on forage intake and cattle performance when grazing stockpiled perennial forages in early spring and late fall/early winter in Manitoba. In trial 1, 32 Angus-Shorthorn cross steers (391.8 ± 19.5 kg) were randomly assigned to one of four treatments: 1) orchardgrass/alfalfa with supplementation (OA-S; n=8), 2) orchardgrass/alfalfa without supplementation (OA-NS; n=8), 3) tall fescue/alfalfa/cicer milkvetch with supplementation (TAC-S; n=8) and 4) tall fescue/alfalfa/cicer milkvetch without supplementation (TAC-NS; n=8) over a 32-d period in early spring. Supplemented steers were offered 3.2 kg hd-1 d-1 of a grain screening pellet delivered by the SmartFeed Pro system. Forage dry matter intake (DMI) did not differ between treatments (P>0.05), suggesting no substitution of forage for supplement occurred. On average, supplement intake was below targeted allotment (1.7 kg hd-1 d-1), with between- and within-animal coefficient of variation (CV) ranging from 32 to 153%. Although serum urea nitrogen (SUN) concentrations did not differ between treatments, average daily gain (ADG) was significantly greater for OA-S than OA-NS by d 32. In trial 2, 32 Angus-Simmental cross bred heifers (402.5 ± 30.7 kg), selected based on confirmed pregnancy and adaptation to SmartFeed Pro systems, were randomly assigned to one of two treatments: 1) non-supplemented (NS; n=16) and 2) supplemented (S; n=16); with target supplement intake of 2.2 kg hd-1 d-1 for two consecutive 21-d periods in late fall/early winter. Forage DMI did not differ (P>0.05) between NS and S treatments and supplement DMI averaged 2.1 kg hd-1 d-1 with between- and within-animal CV values that were < 35%. Significantly higher ADG and SUN levels were observed for S heifers compared to NS. Further, methane (CH4) emissions did not differ, however S heifers emitted significantly more carbon dioxide (CO2) than NS heifers as a consequence of increased ADG. In summary, these findings suggest that precision feeding systems can effectively deliver supplement on pasture, however, adaptation to the feeders in confinement and day-to-day monitoring of the system is essential to ensure the targeted allotment of supplement is consumed.

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 score0.987
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.258 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMspace (University of Manitoba)→Same topicReligion, Spirituality, and Psychology→French-language works237,207→