ArticleJournal of animal science2026
Forage intake and digesta kinetics of lactating beef cattle differing in feed efficiency while grazing Idaho rangelands.
Article in Journal of animal science, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The objective was to determine if 2-yr old cows differing in residual feed intake (RFI) would differ in forage intake and digesta kinetics. Previously classified 2-yr-old lactating Angus × Hereford cows (12 efficient, [EFF]; 12 inefficient, [INE]) were given a pulse dose of an alkane marker and outfitted with grazing collars. Fecal samples were then collected repeatedly over 4 d in June and August. Daily digestible organic matter (DOM) and crude protein (CP) were estimated from fecal near infrared spectroscopy. Data were analyzed by fitting a non-linear digesta kinetics model to individual cows. A mixed model with RFI treatment, period, and their interaction as fixed effects, and cow within treatment as a repeated random effect, was fitted to the combined kinetics data. There were no treatment differences (P > 0.05) between EFF and INE cows for the variables measured, but period differences were present (P < 0.05). Fecal output tended to increase from spring to summer (P = 0.08) and for INE cattle from spring to summer (P = 0.06) but EFF cattle did not differ from spring to summer (P = 0.59). Total marker residence time in the gastrointestinal tract (RTG) was 38.3 and 40.5 ± 1.2 h for INE and EFF cows, respectively in June, and 44.0 and 42.9 ± 1.2 h for INE and EFF cows in August, increasing (P < 0.001) for INE and tending to increase for EFF (P = 0.097). Period RTG was 39.4 vs. 43.4 ± 0.8 h for June vs. August (P < 0.01). Dry matter intake (DMI) in June was 15.6 ± 1.15 kg for INE cows and 17.6 ± 1.10 kg for EFF cows (P = 0.22). August DMI was 17.0 and 16.3 ± 1.10 kg for INE and EFF cows, respectively (P = 0.67). The DOM was 58.9% vs. 53.8% ± 0.36% for June vs. August (P < 0.0001) and CP was 15.0% ± 0.23% vs. 14.2% ± 0.22% (P < 0.05). The CP in the diet declined from spring to summer for EFF cattle (P < 0.05), but not for INE cattle (P = 0.22). The compartmental mass of undigested dry matter (fill) was 6.6 vs. 8.6 ± 0.42 kg for June vs. August (P < 0.01). Bite rates increased from spring to summer (P < 0.05) and for EFF cattle (P < 0.05), but not INE cattle (P = 0.52). Grazing time tended to increase from spring to summer (P = 0.06), and for INE cattle from spring to summer (P = 0.07), but not for EFF cattle (P = 0.41). Reasonable, though slightly inflated, estimates of DMI with the pulse dose procedure were obtained, but differences in DMI for RFI in a feedlot setting did not translate to a range setting.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.