𝔖 Bobbio Scriptorium
✦   LIBER   ✦

A comparison of methods for estimating the cell-wall content of forage

✍ Scribed by Kenneth W. Moir; Peter R. Martin


Publisher
John Wiley and Sons
Year
1984
Tongue
English
Weight
194 KB
Volume
35
Category
Article
ISSN
0022-5142

No coin nor oath required. For personal study only.


πŸ“œ SIMILAR VOLUMES


Comparison of Methods for estimating the
✍ A.F. Bollen; H.X. Nguyen; B.T. Dela Rue πŸ“‚ Article πŸ“… 1999 πŸ› Elsevier Science 🌐 English βš– 158 KB

Several methods for estimating the size of apple bruises have been compared against the actual volume measured using a sectioning and image analysis technique. The estimation methods were not consistent, with large estimation errors at small bruise sizes. The estimation of bruise volume was shown to

A comparison of stated preference method
✍ Mandy Ryan πŸ“‚ Article πŸ“… 2004 πŸ› John Wiley and Sons 🌐 English βš– 98 KB πŸ‘ 1 views

## Abstract This paper presents a comparison of willingness to pay (WTP) estimates generated from a dichotomous choice (DC) contingent valuation experiment and a choice experiment (CE). The study was conducted with subjects undergoing assisted reproductive techniques in the Grampian area of Scotlan

Effect of degradation on the porosity an
✍ Gardner, Peter T; Wood, Timothy J; Chesson, Andrew; Stuchbury, Trevor πŸ“‚ Article πŸ“… 1999 πŸ› John Wiley and Sons 🌐 English βš– 218 KB πŸ‘ 2 views

Cell walls, prepared from the stems of wheat, maize, lucerne and rape and from timothy grass, were degraded using a commercial cellulase enzyme preparation. Timothy and lucerne were extensively degraded (60-70% loss of dry matter) while dry matter losses from the more ligniΓΌed maize, rape and wheat

Methods for the preparation of cell wall
✍ Wβ€ŠG Jardine; Cβ€ŠHβ€ŠL Doeswijk-Voragen; Iβ€ŠMβ€ŠR MacKinnon; Lβ€ŠAβ€ŠM van den Broek; Mβ€ŠA H πŸ“‚ Article πŸ“… 2002 πŸ› John Wiley and Sons 🌐 English βš– 120 KB πŸ‘ 1 views
A NUMERICAL COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVE GA
✍ K.-Y. LEE; A.A. RENSHAW πŸ“‚ Article πŸ“… 2002 πŸ› Elsevier Science 🌐 English βš– 215 KB

This paper provides a concise and unified comparison of four distinct variations of Galerkin's method. The four Galerkin variations are the explicit (traditional), implicit, quadratic implicit, and diagonalized-implicit Galerkin methods. Results indicate that the explicit Galerkin method is superior