Claim · model-written summary
Simulated gross returns from cattle feeding were greater than from marketing corn grain.
- Taxon
- corn
Zea mays subsp. mayst1 - Treatment
- cattle feedinge6
- Outcome
- gross returnse6
- Direction
- greatere6
- Comparator
- marketing corn graine6
Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleSettingValueQualifier
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t1“three corn crop endpoints”
e6“Simulated gross returns from cattle feeding were greater (P > 0.05) than marketing corn grain.”
Title
H. E. Larson; A. A. Hohertz; M. Lostetter; et al. Journal of Animal Science 2016. doi:10.2527/msasas2016-120
Other claims from this paper (8)
- Observation Corn endpoint did not significantly affect DM, CP, NDF and ADF.
- Association Total plant DM at R1 was a poor predictor of crop DM at the three endpoints.
- Association Total plant DM as CS was not highly correlated with crop DM as E or WC.
- Association Yield of E, E residue or CS was not correlated with WC yield.
- Association WC yield was correlated with WC harvest residue, r = 0.878.
- Intervention effect Simulated gross returns were greatest when feeding cattle whole corn WC.
- Intervention effect Simulated gross returns were intermediate when feeding cattle corn earlage E.
- Intervention effect Simulated gross returns were lowest when feeding cattle corn silage CS.