English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Different methods are available to determine fiber content in feeds. However, information about the accuracy of this methods for neutral detergent fiber (NDF) and acid detergent fiber ADF contents estimation (obtained with the use of TNT-100 nylon filtering bags) is very limited related to the large number of ruminant feed analysis. The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy of the automated and conventional Van Soest methods to determine NDF and ADF contents for bovine cattle and feed supplements. Four classes of samples (tropical forage, maize silage hybrid, concentrated supplements and bovine cattlecattle) were evaluated for NDF and ADF contents using conventional and automated methods. Analysis involved a hierarchical factorial scheme with an entirely randomized design executed with repetitions. It was concluded that the automated method procedure generated similar results when compared to the conventional method for the determination of NDF contents in tropical forage, bovine cattle and maize silage samples, although is not recommended for samples with a high starch content. This system was not efficient for ADF determination in the evaluated samples.

Comparative efficacy of the conventional and automated methods for determining neutral and acid detergent fiber