The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Comparison of Methods of In Vitro Dry Matter Digestibility for Ten Feeds
Open accessAbstract
The objectives were to determine if the in vitro dry matter (DM) digestibility was similar by using a traditional method compared to the new DAISYII system and to determine if in vitro DM digestibility was similar for sources of inoculum from two different donor cow diets, all forage or total mixed ration. Ten feeds were digested by the traditional method, the DAISYII method with same feeds in a digestion vessel, and the DAISYII method with different feeds in a digestion vessel. The study used a 2 x 3 factorial arrangement of treatments with two sources of inoculum and three methods. The study was replicated. Source of inoculum affected in vitro DM digestibility; the grass hay donor cow diet resulted in lower digestibility values in six of the 10 feeds tested. Method did not significantly affect the digestibility values, and there were no significant source by method interactions. The DAISYII method can be used to increase labor efficiency in the in vitro DM digestibility analysis, and forages and grains can be analyzed together in a single digestion vessel.
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
Cited by
Getachew, G., Robinson, P. H., DePeters, E. J., & Taylor, S. J. (2004) · Animal Feed Science and Technology · doi:10.1016/s0377-8401(03)00217-7 · Cited by 417
The use of Lactobacillus species as starter cultures for enhancing the quality of sugar cane silage
Ávila, C. L. S., Carvalho, B. F., Pinto, J. C., Duarte, W. F., & Schwan, R. F. (2014) · Journal of Dairy Science · doi:10.3168/jds.2013-6987 · Cited by 125
Bernardes, T. F., De Oliveira, I. L., Lara, M. A. S., Casagrande, D. R., Ávila, C. L. S., & Pereira, O. G. (2015) · Grass and Forage Science · doi:10.1111/gfs.12133 · Cited by 52
Ertekin, İ., & Kızılşimşek, M. (2020) · Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences · doi:10.5713/ajas.18.0801 · Cited by 35
Effect of re-ensiling on the quality of sorghum silage
dos Anjos, G. V. S., Gonçalves, L. C., Rodrigues, J. A. S., Keller, K. M., Coelho, M. M., Michel, P. H. F., Ottoni, D., & Jayme, D. G. (2018) · Journal of Dairy Science · doi:10.3168/jds.2017-13687 · Cited by 31
Metadata
- Authors
- Holden, L. A.
- Venue
- Journal of Dairy Science
- Publisher
- American Dairy Science Association
- Published
- 1999-08
- Volume
- 82
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 1791-1794
- ISSN
- 0022-0302 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2028365570
- Cited by
- 495
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 7.92
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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: Comparison of Methods of In Vitro Dry Matter Digestibility for Ten Feeds. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3168/jds.s0022-0302(99)75409-3
- The paper
- Holden, L. A. (1999). Comparison of Methods of In Vitro Dry Matter Digestibility for Ten Feeds. Journal of Dairy Science. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.s0022-0302(99)75409-3
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.
