Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 900

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Postingestive Feedback as an Elementary Determinant of Food Preference and Intake in Ruminants

Provenza, Frederick D.·1995·Journal of Range Management

Abstract

Ruminants select nutritious diets from a diverse array of plant species that vary in kinds and concentrations of nutrients and toxins, and meet their nutritional requirements that vary with age, physiological state, and environmental conditions. Thus, ruminants possess a degree of nutritional wisdom in the sense that they generally select foods that meet nutritional needs and avoid foods that cause toxicosis. There is little reason to believe that nutritional wisdom occurs because animals can directly taste or smell either nutrients or toxins in foods. Instead, there is increasing evidence that neurally mediated interactions between the senses (i.e., taste and smell) and the viscera enable ruminants to sense the consequences of food ingestion, and these interactions operate in subtle but profound ways to affect food selection and intake, as well as the hedonic value of food. The sensation of being satisfied to the full (i.e., satiety) occurs when animals ingest adequate kinds and amounts of nutritious foods, and animals acquire preferences (mild to strong) for foods that cause satiety. Unpleasant feelings of physical discomfort (i.e., malaise) are caused by excesses of nutrients and toxins and by nutrient deficits, and animals acquire aversions (mild to strong) to foods that cause malaise. What constitutes excesses and deficits depends on each animals morphology, physiology, and nutritional requirements. This does not mean that ruminants must maximize (optimize) intake of any particular nutrient or mix of nutrients within each meal or even on a daily basis, given that they can withstand departures from the normal average intake of nutrients (i.e., energy-rich substances, nitrogen, various minerals, and vitamins). Rather, homeostatic regulation needs only some increasing tendency, as a result of a gradually worsening deficit of some nutrient or of an excess of toxins or nutrients, to generate behavior to correct the disorder. Extreme states should cause herbivores to increase diet breadth and to acquire preferences for foods that rectify maladies. From an evolutionary standpoint, mechanisms that enable animals to experience feedback, sensations such as satiety and malaise, should be highly correlated with nutritional well being, toxicosis, and nutritional deficiencies, which are directly related with survival and reproduction.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2307/4002498

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 900

Metadata

Authors
Provenza, F. D.
Venue
Journal of Range Management
Publisher
JSTOR
Published
1995-01
Volume
48
Issue
1
Pages
2
ISSN
0022-409X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1867955960
Cited by
900
References
1
FWCI
60.95
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Postingestive Feedback as an Elementary Determinant of Food Preference and Intake in Ruminants. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/4002498
The paper
Provenza, F. D. (1995). Postingestive Feedback as an Elementary Determinant of Food Preference and Intake in Ruminants. Journal of Range Management. https://doi.org/10.2307/4002498

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.