MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7056471256

Economic feasibility of incorporating pea coproducts in a Manitoba cow-calf operation

2022· dissertation· en· W7056471256 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueMspace (University of Manitoba) · 2022
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicMagnetic confinement fusion research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLivestockField peaLegumeProfitability indexProduction (economics)NutrientBeef cattleEconomic feasibility
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Low-cost feeds that fulfill the nutritional needs of cattle are critical to the profitability of livestock operations. Feed, accounting for 50-60% of total production costs, is the primary expense associated with most livestock operations. Byproducts can be an inexpensive addition to livestock feeds, often possessing nutritional value comparable to the original feed source. The Roquette Pea Protein plant in Portage La Prairie, Manitoba produces 500 tons of pea protein per day, generating three different byproducts with potential for incorporation into cattle diets: pea hulls, pea cream and pea screenings. This research developed and evaluated six different over-winter cow-calf feeding systems incorporating pea screenings. The objectives of this research were to: (1) compare the quantity of pea screenings or barley needed to meet the energy requirements of a 1300lb cow in the third trimester of pregnancy, feeding grass legume hay, grass, or straw-based diets during the 90 day over-winter period; (2) compare the cost of the three forage-based rations when supplemented with either barley or pea screenings; and (3) determine the price at which rations containing pea screenings are equivalent in cost to (i.e. break-even with) the three conventional barley-based rations. Price data on the traditional feed ingredients were approximate ten-year averages while pea screenings price was assumed to be 75% of the long-term average price for field peas. All six rations were nutritionally balanced by the Beef Cattle Nutrient Requirements Model 2016 (NRC 2016). Results demonstrate that pea screenings are slightly lower in TDN than barley (80% vs 84%) and can be incorporated as an energy supplement at a slightly higher inclusion rate in Manitoba cow-calf winter rations during the third trimester of pregnancy. Breakeven analysis revealed nine separate pea screening prices where the cost of each alternative ration was comparable with each conventional ration. Findings further suggest that pea screenings price may need to decrease from $176.46/ton to as low as $58.17/ton to incentivize cow-calf producers currently feeding a ration of barley straw supplemented with barley grain to switch to a ration of grass legume hay supplemented with pea screenings.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.845
Threshold uncertainty score0.309

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.225 · 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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMspace (University of Manitoba)→Same topicMagnetic confinement fusion research→French-language works237,207→