T. S. Oliveira, I. N. Silva, E. S. Aniceto, José Ribeiro Meirelles Júnior
{"title":"多变量和单变量分析在肉牛饲料效率评价中的应用","authors":"T. S. Oliveira, I. N. Silva, E. S. Aniceto, José Ribeiro Meirelles Júnior","doi":"10.14393/bj-v39n0a2023-67310","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study aimed to compare the univariate analyses (relationship between dry matter intake (DMI) and average daily gain (ADG), Kleiber ratio, and residual feed intake) and multivariate analysis (bionutritional index [BNI]) to determine feed efficiency. Were used a total of 160 cattle (individual data) and the analyzed variables were dry matter intake, weight gain, and body weight of the animals. We used five methods to evaluate feed efficiency, the BNI, FE, corrected feeding efficiency (corFE), Kleiber ratio (KR), and residual feed intake (RFI). Study 1 demonstrated that only the FE (p=0.0472) was significant, although the FE after the transformation of Box-Cox (corFE) (p=0.0642) showed a statistical trend. In studies 2, 3, and 5, we observed that BNI was the best biological efficiency indicator. In the study 4, we observed that the best indicators were FE (0.110; p=0.0281), corFE (0.380; p=0.0429), and RFI (0.465; p=0.0340) for the genders. However, corFE decreased the coefficient of variation in all studies. In conclusion, the use of the Box-Cox transformation is as efficient as the multivariate analysis in discriminating experimental groups (genetic groups, different levels of concentrate in the diet, and genders) concerning the other univariate analyzes.","PeriodicalId":8951,"journal":{"name":"Bioscience Journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Application of the multivariate and univariate analyses to estimate the feed efficiency in beef cattle\",\"authors\":\"T. S. Oliveira, I. N. Silva, E. S. Aniceto, José Ribeiro Meirelles Júnior\",\"doi\":\"10.14393/bj-v39n0a2023-67310\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This study aimed to compare the univariate analyses (relationship between dry matter intake (DMI) and average daily gain (ADG), Kleiber ratio, and residual feed intake) and multivariate analysis (bionutritional index [BNI]) to determine feed efficiency. Were used a total of 160 cattle (individual data) and the analyzed variables were dry matter intake, weight gain, and body weight of the animals. We used five methods to evaluate feed efficiency, the BNI, FE, corrected feeding efficiency (corFE), Kleiber ratio (KR), and residual feed intake (RFI). Study 1 demonstrated that only the FE (p=0.0472) was significant, although the FE after the transformation of Box-Cox (corFE) (p=0.0642) showed a statistical trend. In studies 2, 3, and 5, we observed that BNI was the best biological efficiency indicator. In the study 4, we observed that the best indicators were FE (0.110; p=0.0281), corFE (0.380; p=0.0429), and RFI (0.465; p=0.0340) for the genders. However, corFE decreased the coefficient of variation in all studies. In conclusion, the use of the Box-Cox transformation is as efficient as the multivariate analysis in discriminating experimental groups (genetic groups, different levels of concentrate in the diet, and genders) concerning the other univariate analyzes.\",\"PeriodicalId\":8951,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Bioscience Journal\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Bioscience Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.14393/bj-v39n0a2023-67310\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"AGRICULTURE, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bioscience Journal","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14393/bj-v39n0a2023-67310","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"AGRICULTURE, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Application of the multivariate and univariate analyses to estimate the feed efficiency in beef cattle
This study aimed to compare the univariate analyses (relationship between dry matter intake (DMI) and average daily gain (ADG), Kleiber ratio, and residual feed intake) and multivariate analysis (bionutritional index [BNI]) to determine feed efficiency. Were used a total of 160 cattle (individual data) and the analyzed variables were dry matter intake, weight gain, and body weight of the animals. We used five methods to evaluate feed efficiency, the BNI, FE, corrected feeding efficiency (corFE), Kleiber ratio (KR), and residual feed intake (RFI). Study 1 demonstrated that only the FE (p=0.0472) was significant, although the FE after the transformation of Box-Cox (corFE) (p=0.0642) showed a statistical trend. In studies 2, 3, and 5, we observed that BNI was the best biological efficiency indicator. In the study 4, we observed that the best indicators were FE (0.110; p=0.0281), corFE (0.380; p=0.0429), and RFI (0.465; p=0.0340) for the genders. However, corFE decreased the coefficient of variation in all studies. In conclusion, the use of the Box-Cox transformation is as efficient as the multivariate analysis in discriminating experimental groups (genetic groups, different levels of concentrate in the diet, and genders) concerning the other univariate analyzes.
Bioscience JournalAgricultural and Biological Sciences-General Agricultural and Biological Sciences
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
90
审稿时长
48 weeks
期刊介绍:
The Bioscience Journal is an interdisciplinary electronic journal that publishes scientific articles in the areas of Agricultural Sciences, Biological Sciences and Health Sciences. Its mission is to disseminate new knowledge while contributing to the development of science in the country and in the world. The journal is published in a continuous flow, in English. The opinions and concepts expressed in the published articles are the sole responsibility of their authors.