Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 504

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Predicting Digestibility of Different Diets with Internal Markers: Evaluation of Four Potential Markers

Cochran, R. C., Adams, D. C., Wallace, J. D., Galyean, M. L.·1986·Journal of Animal Science

Abstract

Four independent digestion trials with four diets were conducted using four Hereford × Angus steers per trial to evaluate the ability of four internal markers to predict in vivo dry matter digestibility. Diets were 1) cubed alfalfa hay; 2) tall fescue (pre-boot stage, harvested .5 h before feeding); 3) tall wheatgrass hay plus .9 kg soybean meal (SBM)/d and 4) prairie hay. Forages were fed once daily at 90% of ad libitum intake. Separation of internal markers was accomplished by 1) 6-d in vitro fermentation followed by acid detergent fiber (ADF) extraction (IVADF); 2) 6-d in vitro fermentation followed by neutral detergent fiber extraction (IVNDF); 3) ADF extraction followed by 3-h digestion with 72% H2SO4 (ADD and 4) ADF extraction followed by 10-d cellulase incubation (ADFIC). Dry matter digestibility (DMD) was calculated from the feed:feces ratio of each internal marker and compared with in vivo apparent DMD within each diet. When compared within both cubed alfalfa hay and tall wheatgrass/SBM, digestion coefficients from IVADF ratio and IVNDF ratio were similar (P>.10) to in vivo coefficients. However, digestion coefficients from ADL ratio and ADFIC differed (P<.01) from in vivo apparent digestibilities. When compared within tall fescue and prairie hay, digestion coefficients from all internal markers evaluated were different (P<.01) from in vivo digestion coefficients. Fecal marker recoveries explained observed differences between in vivo DMD and DMD from marker ratios. The relationship between in vivo DMD and DMD determined by IVADF and IVNDF ratio was highly variable. Caution should be exercised in using IVADF and IVNDF as internal markers, particularly with immature, freshly harvested or grazed forage. Acid detergent lignin and ADFIC were least acceptable for use as internal markers in all diets evaluated.

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 · 10.2527/jas1986.6351476x

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.

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

Cited by

See all 504

Metadata

Authors
Cochran, R. C., Adams, D. C., Wallace, J. D., & Galyean, M. L.
Venue
Journal of Animal Science
Published
1986-11-01
Volume
63
Issue
5
Pages
1476-1483
ISSN
  • 0021-8812 (ISSN-L)
  • 1525-3163
OpenAlex
W224773131
Cited by
504
References
0
FWCI
3.04
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: Predicting Digestibility of Different Diets with Internal Markers: Evaluation of Four Potential Markers. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2527/jas1986.6351476x
The paper
Cochran, R. C., Adams, D. C., Wallace, J. D., & Galyean, M. L. (1986). Predicting Digestibility of Different Diets with Internal Markers: Evaluation of Four Potential Markers. Journal of Animal Science. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas1986.6351476x

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.