Effect of nutritional regimen and breed on growth performance, carcass characteristics and meat quality in beef cattle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The effects of nutritional regimen, breed and their interaction on growth performance, carcass attributes, and meat quality were evaluated in 72 crossbred Angus (AN) and Charolais (CH) steers fed to a 10 mm backfat endpoint. Cattle were managed on one of three nutritional regimens which involved ad libitum feeding of a 77% high moisture corn diet from the start of the trial or after limit feeding of the 77% HMC diet for 84 days or backgrounding on haylage for 154 days. Backgrounding decreased (P < 0.001) DMI and gains in AN vs. CH steers compared with grain feeding. Shear force in the longissimus and semintendinosus muscles was increased with a period of limit feeding in CH vs. AN steers versus continuously fed steers. Limit feeding a high energy diet may be used as an appropriate management regimen for cattle of British background to reduce feed input costs, while ensuring meat quality and tenderness.
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 | 0.000 | 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".