CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 62Ruminant Nutrition and Digestive PhysiologyCrop Yield and Soil FertilityAnimal Nutrition and Physiology

Corn Silage Hybrid Effects on Intake, Digestion, and Milk Production by Dairy Cows

Open access
Bal, M.A., Shaver, R.D., Al-Jobeile, H., Coors, J.G., Lauer, J.G.·2000·Journal of Dairy Science
DOI 10.3168/jds.s0022-0302(00)75185-x
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Three corn hybrids harvested as whole-plant silage were evaluated in three separate feeding trials with lactating dairy cows. In trial 1, 24 multiparous Holstein cows were used in a replicated 4 x 4 Latin square with 28-d periods. Treatments were conventional (Pioneer 3563) and leafy (Mycogen TMF 106) corn silage hybrids, each planted at low (59,000 plants/ha) and high (79,000 plants/ha) plant populations. There were no milk production differences between treatments. Total-tract digestibility of dietary starch was higher for leafy compared with conventional corn hybrids. In trial 2, 26 multiparous Holstein cows were assigned randomly to diets containing either conventional (48% forage diet) or brown-midrib (60% forage diet) corn silage in a crossover design with 8-wk periods. Milk yield was lower, but milk fat percentage and yield were higher, for the high-forage diet containing brown-midrib corn silage. In trial 3, 24 multiparous Holstein cows were used in a replicated 4 x 4 Latin square with 28-d periods. Treatments were corn silage at two concentrations of neutral detergent fiber (Garst 8751, 39.2% NDF; Cargill 3677, 32.8% NDF) each fed in normal- (53% of dry matter) and high- (61 to 67% of dry matter) forage diets. Milk production was not different between corn hybrids. Increased concentrate supplementation increased DMI and milk production. There were minimal benefits to the feeding of leafy or low-fiber corn silage hybrids. Feeding brown-midrib corn silage in a high-forage diet increased milk fat percentage and yield compared with conventional corn silage fed in a normal-forage diet.

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 · 10.3168/jds.s0022-0302(00)75185-x

Cites

28 of 28 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Although NDF degradation of BMR cultivars is much higher within the rumen, effects of BMR on total tract in vivo NDF digestibility are equivocal.

    “Although the NDF degradation of BMR cultivars is much higher within the rumen, the effects of BMR on the total tract (in vivo) NDF digestibility are equivocal.69,70”

    From Nutritive value of maize silage in relation to dairy cow performance and milk quality (2015) · cites this paper as [70]

    The Trial 2 passages compare BMR with a conventional hybrid but discuss composition, intake, and milk production, not ruminal NDF degradation or total-tract NDF digestibility. The total-tract NDF results in Trial 3 concern different hybrids (39NDF and 33NDF). Searches for BMR ruminal degradation and total-tract digestibility found no passage settling the claim. (LLM, conf=0.74)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. [9]9. Coors, J. G., P. R. Carter, and R. B. Hunter. 1994. Silage corn. Pages 305-340 in Specialty Corns. A. R. Hallauer, ed. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.
  2. [12]12. Dwyer, L. M., D. W. Stewart, B. L. Ma, and F. Glenn. 1998. Silage maize yield response to plant populations. Pages 00-00 in Proc. of the 53rd Annu. Corn and Sorghum Industry Research Conf. Chicago, IL. Am Seed Trade Assoc., Washington, DC.
  3. [32]32. SAS User's Guide: Statistics, Version 7 Edition. 1998. SAS Inst., Inc., Cary, NC.
  4. [33]33. Shaver, D. 1983. Genetics and breeding of maize with extra leaves above the ear. Pages 161-180 in Proc. of the 38th Annual Corn and Sorghum Industry Research Conference. Chicago, IL. Ameri- can Seed Trade Association, Washington, DC.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Bal, M. A., Shaver, R. D., Al-Jobeile, H., Coors, J. G., & Lauer, J. G.
Affiliations
University of Wisconsin–Madison (US)
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Dairy Science
Publisher
American Dairy Science Association
Published
2000-12
Volume
83
Issue
12
Pages
2849-2858
ISSN
0022-0302 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.3168/jds.s0022-0302(00)75185-x
OpenAlex
W2142905761
Cited by
62
References
28
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 2 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 4
FWCI
12.47
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Journal of Dairy Science (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Agronomy and Crop Science › Ruminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Agronomy and Crop Science › Crop Yield and Soil Fertility
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Animal Science and Zoology › Animal Nutrition and Physiology
Keywords
dairy cattle, milk production, milk fat, total tract digestibility, starch digestibility, neutral detergent fiber, concentrate supplementation, dry matter intake, plant density, Holstein cows
MeSH terms
Animals, Cattle, Chimera, Zea mays, Digestion, Eating, Female, Lactation, Milk, Silage, Time Factors

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