The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Effects of bacterial direct-fed microbials and yeast on site and extent of digestion, blood chemistry, and subclinical ruminal acidosis in feedlot cattle1,2
Open accessAbstract
Two studies were conducted to determine whether a bacterial direct-fed microbial (DFM) alone or with yeast could minimize the risk of acidosis and improve feed utilization in feedlot cattle receiving high-concentrate diets. Eight ruminally cannulated steers, previously adapted to a high-concentrate diet, were used in crossover designs to study the effects of DFM on feed intake, ruminal pH, ruminal fermentation, blood characteristics, site and extent of digestion, and microbial protein synthesis. Steers were provided ad libitum access to a diet containing steam-rolled barley, barley silage, and a protein-mineral supplement (87, 8, and 5% on a DM basis, respectively). In Exp. 1, treatments were control vs. the lactic-acid producing bacterium Enterococcus faecium EF212 (EF; 6 x 10(9) cfu/d). In Exp. 2, treatments were control vs EF (6 x 10(9) cfu/d) and yeast (Saccharomyces cerevisiae; 6 x 10(9) cfu/d). Supplementing feedlot cattle diets with EF in Exp. 1 increased (P < 0.05) propionate and (P < 0.05) decreased butyrate concentrations, decreased the nadir of ruminal pH (P < 0.05), enhanced the flow of feed N (P < 0.10) to the duodenum but reduced that of microbial N (P < 0.10), reduced (P < 0.10) intestinal digestion of NDF, and increased (P < 0.10) fecal coliform numbers. Other than the increase in propionate concentrations that signify an increase in energy precursors for growth, the other metabolic changes were generally considered to be undesirable. In Exp. 2, providing EF together with yeast abolished most of these undesirable effects. Combining EF with yeast increased the DM digestion of corn grain incubated in sacco, but there were no effects on altering the site or extent of nutrient digestion. The diets used in this study were highly fermentable, and the incidence of subclinical ruminal acidosis, defined as steers with ruminal pH below 5.5 for prolonged periods of time, was high. Supplementing the diet with EF, with or without yeast, had limited effects on reducing ruminal acidosis. It seems that cattle adapted to high-grain diets are able to maintain relatively high feed intake and high fiber digestion despite low ruminal pH. The Enterococcus faecium bacterium and yeast used in this study were of limited value for feedlot cattle already adapted to high-grain diets.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Van Soest, P. J., Robertson, J. B., & Lewis, B. A. (1991) · Journal of Dairy Science · doi:10.3168/jds.s0022-0302(91)78551-2 · Cited by 28,658
Mode of action of the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae as a feed additive for ruminants
Newbold, C. J., Wallace, R. J., & Mcintosh, F. M. (1996) · British Journal Of Nutrition · doi:10.1079/bjn19960029 · Cited by 347
Cited by
Nutritional management for enteric methane abatement: a review
Beauchemin, K. A., Kreuzer, M., O'Mara, F., & McAllister, T. A. (2008) · Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture · doi:10.1071/ea07199 · Cited by 1,162
Self-citationRuminal Acidosis in Beef Cattle: The Current Microbiological and Nutritional Outlook
Nagaraja, T. G., & Titgemeyer, E. C. (2007) · Journal of Dairy Science · doi:10.3168/jds.2006-478 · Cited by 873
Effects of active dry yeasts on the rumen microbial ecosystem: Past, present and future
Chaucheyras-Durand, F., Walker, N. D., & Bach, A. (2008) · Animal Feed Science and Technology · doi:10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2007.04.019 · Cited by 466
Desnoyers, M., Giger-Reverdin, S., Bertin, G., Duvaux-Ponter, C., & Sauvant, D. (2009) · Journal of Dairy Science · doi:10.3168/jds.2008-1414 · Cited by 420
Review: The use of direct fed microbials to mitigate pathogens and enhance production in cattle
McAllister, T. A., Beauchemin, K. A., Alazzeh, A. Y., Baah, J., Teather, R. M., & Stanford, K. (2011) · Canadian Journal of Animal Science · doi:10.4141/cjas10047 · Cited by 251
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Beauchemin, K. A., Yang, W. Z., Morgavi, D. P., Ghorbani, G. R., Kautz, W., & Leedle, J. A. Z.
- Venue
- Journal of Animal Science
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2003-06-01
- Volume
- 81
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 1628-1640
- ISSN
- 0021-8812 (ISSN-L)
- 1525-3163
- OpenAlex
- W181320506
- Cited by
- 233
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 12.23
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
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: Effects of bacterial direct-fed microbials and yeast on site and extent of digestion, blood chemistry, and subclinical ruminal acidosis in feedlot cattle1,2. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2527/2003.8161628x
- The paper
- Beauchemin, K. A., Yang, W. Z., Morgavi, D. P., Ghorbani, G. R., Kautz, W., & Leedle, J. A. Z. (2003). Effects of bacterial direct-fed microbials and yeast on site and extent of digestion, blood chemistry, and subclinical ruminal acidosis in feedlot cattle1,2. Journal of Animal Science. https://doi.org/10.2527/2003.8161628x
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.