MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7133271807

Le millet : source de biocarburant et d’ensilage pour ruminants

2025· other· W7133271807 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Canada. Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada. Science and Technology Branch, Canada. Agriculture et agroalimentaire Canada. Direction générale des sciences et de la technologie

Bibliographic record

VenueFederal Open Science Repository of Canada / Le Dépôt fédéral de science ouverte du Canada · 2025
Typeother
Language
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnimal productionLivestockForageContext (archaeology)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Millet, a source of biofuel and silage for ruminantsCanada is the world's fifth largest producer of ethanol, a renewable fuel made mainly from corn and wheat grown in several provinces.Ethanol produced from organic matter -either waste or crops grown specifically for that purpose -it is referred to as bioethanol.Bioethanol fuel is cleaner than gasoline or diesel because the crops used to produce it absorb carbon dioxide (CO 2 ), a greenhouse gas.To find new sources of raw materials that can be used to make bioethanol, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC) scientists studied sweet pearl millet and sweet sorghum, two drought-tolerant millet species that require less fertilizer or water than other energy crops to grow.Their research showed that these two species have good potential for producing bioethanol, and their stalks, once the sugars are extracted, can also produce silage (fermented forage) for feeding cattle.Ethanol comes from sweet pearl millet and sweet sorghum by pressing the stalks to extract sugar-rich juice that is then fermented into ethanol.However, transporting the stalks to a processing plant is expensive because of its weight, and the sugars in the stalks degrade rapidly after cutting.To avoid these problems, AAFC scientists tested methods of extracting this liquid using presses right in the field.They found that the following method gave the best results:• Roughly chop the stems, then press for the first time;• Soak a quantity of bagasse (post-pressing residue) in half as much water at ambient temperatures; • Press a second time to remove residual sweet liquid.The second pressing increased the amount of sweet liquid by 20%, which could mean getting more than 750 litres of ethanol per hectare under Quebec soil and climatic conditions.This method also made it possible to make a dual use of millet and sorghum from the same harvest.Once the sweet liquid has been extracted to be transformed into bioethanol, the residual bagasse can be converted into quality silage for animal feed, because this pressing method leaves enough sugars in the bagasse to ensure good fermentation.Further research is needed to study this pressing method and its effect on silage digestibility and milk production by cows.Optimizing the extraction of sugar-rich liquid for ethanol production, and using the resulting bagasse as silage, will help increase the profitability of bioethanol production plants and growers of bio-energy crops.

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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.004

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.226 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFederal Open Science Repository of Canada / Le Dépôt fédéral de science ouverte du Canada→French-language works237,207→