| Literature DB >> 35049841 |
Khaterine C Salazar-Cubillas1, Uta Dickhoefer1,2.
Abstract
The authors wish to make the following correction to their paper [...].Entities:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35049841 PMCID: PMC8773128 DOI: 10.3390/ani12020173
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Animals (Basel) ISSN: 2076-2615 Impact factor: 2.752
Predictions of the post-ruminal crude protein (PRCP) supply as estimated with the reference and in vitro methods at rumen passage rates of 2, 5, and 8%/h and as calculated with the chemical method using the equation of Zhao and Cao [5] at rumen passage rate of 5%/h of fresh tropical forage grasses and legumes.
| Error-Index c | Dimensionless d | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kp a | PRCP Method b | Mean | Mean Bias | RMSE | MAPE | RSR | Concordance Correlation Coefficient | ||
| [%/h] | [g/kg Dry Matter] | [g/kg Dry Matter] | [% Mean Reference PRCP] | [% Mean Reference PRCP] | [From 0 to ∞] | Coefficient [From −1 to 1] | ρ [From −1 to 1] | Cb [From 0 to 1] | |
| Fresh Tropical Forages (n = 38) | |||||||||
| 2 | Reference PRCP | 113 | |||||||
| In vitro PRCP | 108 | 5.17 | 17 | 14 | 1.26 | 0.53 | 0.65 | 0.82 | |
| 5 | Reference PRCP | 119 | |||||||
| In vitro PRCP | 117 | 2.83 | 16 | 13 | 0.99 | 0.69 | 0.84 | 0.83 | |
| Chemical PRCP | 200 | −66.91 | 74 | 67 | 4.68 | 0.14 | 0.87 | 0.16 | |
| 8 | Reference PRCP | 122 | |||||||
| In vitro PRCP | 123 | 1.17 | 15 | 13 | 0.86 | 0.74 | 0.88 | 0.84 | |
| Fresh Tropical Forage Grasses (n = 23) | |||||||||
| 2 | Reference PRCP | 105 | |||||||
| In vitro PRCP | 100 | 5.90 | 16 | 13 | 1.60 | 0.53 | 0.75 | 0.71 | |
| 5 | Reference PRCP | 110 | |||||||
| In vitro PRCP | 102 | 8.61 | 15 | 13 | 1.22 | 0.66 | 0.89 | 0.73 | |
| Chemical PRCP | 173 | −56.04 | 62 | 56 | 5.05 | 0.13 | 0.83 | 0.16 | |
| 8 | Reference PRCP | 113 | |||||||
| In vitro PRCP | 105 | 8.37 | 13 | 12 | 0.98 | 0.73 | 0.93 | 0.78 | |
| Fresh Tropical Forage Legumes (n = 15) | |||||||||
| 2 | Reference PRCP | 125 | |||||||
| In vitro PRCP | 120 | 4.05 | 19 | 14 | 1.93 | 0.20 | 0.30 | 0.65 | |
| 5 | Reference PRCP | 132 | |||||||
| In vitro PRCP | 140 | −6.03 | 16 | 13 | 1.46 | 0.29 | 0.39 | 0.73 | |
| Chemical PRCP | 242 | −83.59 | 85 | 84 | 7.62 | 0.03 | 0.56 | 0.05 | |
| 8 | Reference PRCP | 137 | |||||||
| In vitro PRCP | 150 | −9.87 | 17 | 15 | 1.33 | 0.30 | 0.44 | 0.68 | |
a Passage rates through the rumen. b PRCP methods: reference PRCP, PRCP supply determined at rumen passage rates of 2, 5, and 8%/h with the equation N°11 of Lebzien et al. [15] using information on in situ rumen-undegraded crude protein at rumen passage rates of 2, 5 and 8%/h, crude protein, and digested organic matter concentration determined from in vitro gas production; in vitro PRCP, PRCP supply estimated with the in vitro method [4]; chemical PRCP, PRCP supply calculated from concentrations of crude protein fractions using the equation of Zhao and Cao [5] for dried forage grasses, a grass silage, a fresh forage legume, and corn and soybean by-products. Results from the chemical method were only compared at a rumen passage rate of 5%/h, because the method was validated against a PRCP measurement after 24 h in vitro incubation, which resembles a PRCP supply at a rumen passage rate of 5%/h. c Error-index measurements include measures on mean bias, root mean square error (RMSE), and mean absolute percentage error (MAPE). d Dimensionless; includes measures such as the ratio between root mean square error and standard deviation (RSR), the concordance correlation coefficient (CCC), and its partitioning into correlation coefficient (ρ, i.e., precision) and bias correction factor (Cb; i.e., accuracy).