A7080 Recent Advances in Ruminant Nutrition Individual Assignment Brief 2025/26 | Harper Adams University
| University | Harper Adams University (HAU) |
| Subject | A7080 Recent Advances in Ruminant Nutrition |
Assignment Brief
(Online submission only)
Module Name (Module Code): Recent Advances in Ruminant Nutrition (A7080)
Module Tutor: Liam Sinclair
Assignment Title: Recent Advances in Ruminant Nutrition
Assignment Type: Individual Assignment
Time Guide: 20 hours
Word/Page Limit 3500 (excluding figures, tables or references):
File Type: Acceptable file types for Turnitin: MS Word, Excel & PowerPoint, the Non-Flat version of PDF is acceptable however cannot include video or audio embedded (please delete as applicable)
File Size Limit: 50 MB
Struggling with Your A7080 Recent Advances in Ruminant Nutrition Assignment?
Module Outcomes Assessed:
1. Evaluate recent research advances in the field of ruminant nutrition and explain how they may impact on the nutrition of cattle, sheep and other ruminant species.
2. Discuss potential nutritional problems in dairy cow, beef, sheep and other ruminant feeding systems and synthesise appropriate solutions to improve feed efficiency, product quality, health and welfare.
3. Evaluate the influence of recent developments in nutrition on milk and meat product quality and composition.
4. Explain the influence of nutrition on animal health, welfare and reproduction, evaluate how legislation may impact on this, and propose and justify nutritional strategies to reduce disease incidence and improve health and fertility.
5. Assess the influence of nutrition on the environmental impact of ruminant production systems and synthesise dietary strategies to minimise their impact whilst maintaining animal performance and health.
| Submission Deadline: 15.00 on Thursday 11th December 2025
Please ensure that your student number is included at the beginning of your submission title when uploading your work |
Artificial Intelligence (AI) Guidance
Resources to support the appropriate use of AI can be found on The Learning Hub. The university encourages ethical, responsible use of AI.
For this specific task (please adjust as appropriate):
- It is encouraged / permitted / not permitted to use AI to assist in the initial development of ideas for this assignment.
- It is permitted / not permitted to use AI to refine writing phrases for use in this assignment.
- Module leaders add guidance or delete this line
As you use AI, remember that it has limitations and your writing and ideas will often be better.
Where permitted AI has been used this must be acknowledged at the beginning of the assignment as per the Academic Integrity and Academic Misconduct Policy.
Assignment Submission Declaration
Submission declaration: In submitting this assignment I/we declare that the work is my/our own work and that it meets the standards of academic integrity expected at all times. I/we also confirm that this work conforms to the stated Artificial Intelligence guidance for this assignment brief and has not previously been submitted for assessment for an academic award, unless otherwise indicated.
Task Outline
Students should work individually.
Write a technical report on one of the following topics. An alternative topic that is directly related to your work can be used after discussion and agreement with the Module Leader.
Topics:
- Choline as a dietary supplement to either finishing beef animals OR dairy cows: effects on performance and health.
- Dietary cation anion balance as a means to reduce milk fever in cattle OR sheep
- Dietary supplementation with nicotinamide and its effect on ketosis in dairy cows
- One carbon metabolism and epigenetic regulation of lamb growth, carcase composition and health
- Organically bound (chelated) minerals compared with inorganic sources: effects on dairy OR suckler cow OR ewe performance, health and reproduction (note: only one mineral can be selected).
- Sub-acute ruminal acidosis in intensive beef OR dairy systems: prevalence, risk factors and dietary means to reduce
- Lucerne OR red clover in the diet of high yielding dairy cows: inclusion and appropriate supplementation to optimise performance and reduce nitrogen excretion.
- Reducing the dietary protein level in the diet of pregnant ewes: effects on performance, metabolism and subsequent lamb performance
- Evaluation of yeasts in the diet of beef OR dairy cows OR sheep
- Cobalt and vitamin B12: effects on ruminal metabolism, energy metabolism and performance of beef OR dairy cattle OR sheep
- Effects of accelerated calf rearing programmes on subsequent calf and heifer performance
- Recent developments in forage additives to improve silage quality and animal performance
- Effects of dietary fat type and level on the reproductive performance of dairy cows.
- Effect of forage chop length on silage quality, intake, rumen metabolism, the rumen microbiome and performance of ruminants.
- Vitamin E supplementation of pregnant ewes: effects on ewe and lamb performance and health
- Phosphorus metabolism in dairy cows and dietary means to reduce P excretion
- Dietary means to reduce the ammonia emissions from dairy farms
- Effect of rumen protected arginine supplementation on ewe and lamb performance
- Effect of β-agonists or anabolic steroids on the nutrient requirements and performance of finishing beef cattle
- Multispecies swards for sheep OR beef OR dairy: effects on health and performance
- Effects of level and source of fat and protein in calf milk replacers: effects on performance, development and health.
- Nutrition of out-wintered beef OR dairy cattle
- Feeding propylene glycol in the peri-parturient period in ewes OR suckler cows OR dairy cows on health and performance
- Dietary means to reduce lameness in sheep OR dairy OR beef cattle
- Compare and contrast the effects of dietary methane inhibitors available in the UK on rumen fermentation and the microbiome, methane production and the performance of beef OR dairy cattle.
- Dietary means to improve the fatty acid composition of lamb, beef or milk to more closely meet human nutritional guidelines.
Presentation Requirements
The assignment should be presented in the form of a written report in the general style of the journal Animal. It should include a very brief abstract and introduction at the beginning. All references used should conform with the style provided in Animal. The Harper Adams’ Guide to Report Writing is available through the library intranet home page for report formats https://www.harper-adams.ac.uk/university-life/library/35/study-guides/ should be used for general guidance, but the style should be that of Animal, and an example review paper from Animal is available on the Learning Hub. A wide variety of information sources may be used, but the main focus must be on peer reviewed papers. The list of references is not included in the word count. Use of tables of data and figures to illustrate and support your points is expected, but is not included in the word count.
Need Help Writing Your Harper Adams Technical Nutrition Report?
Marking Criteria
| Presentation, style and communication skills | Content, knowledge and understanding | Analysis, evaluation and application | Referencing and use of literature | |
| Context | Presentation should be in the style of an article for Recent Advances in Animal Nutrition | A relevant and topical subject in ruminant nutrition that is researched using relevant and reliable information sources | Provides practical advice that can be used by those in the feed industry that is based on sound evidence | Use of references in the text should comply with the style of the example A full list of references must be provided at the end of the article and presented in a format that comply with the HAU Guide to Referencing |
| Weighting Mark range | 10 | 45 | 25 | 20 |
| 90-100 | Exceptional presentation that conforms to guidelines and displays creativity, flair and imagination in both structure and style, using a variety of tools appropriate to the audience and discipline. | Work based on an excellent understanding and knowledge of ruminant nutrition obtained from specific published literature appropriate for Level 7 that is at the forefront of the discipline through wider reading. Publishable quality. | Exceptional arguments based on a highly critical and perceptive analysis and evaluation of complex knowledge and concepts relating to the topic at Level 7. Excellent practical application that will significantly benefit ruminant nutrition. | Exceptional use of a variety of reliable, appropriate sources for Level 7, including peer reviewed journals, selected independently. Limitations of sources assessed. References complete and comply with the Guide to Referencing. No errors. |
| 80-89 | Excellent presentation that conforms to guidelines and provides a persuasive argument using a logical and coherent structure that displays a mature, articulate and imaginative style, using appropriate tools for the audience and discipline. | Work based on a full and complete understanding of appropriate knowledge of ruminant nutrition for Level 7. Evidence of specific knowledge from published literature obtained through wider reading. Publishable quality with minimal editing | Excellent arguments based on a critical and perceptive analysis and evaluation of knowledge and concepts relating to the chosen topic at Level 7. Very good practical application that will be of considerable benefit ruminant nutrition. | Excellent use of a variety of reliable, appropriate sources for Level 7, including peer reviewed journals, most selected independently. Limitations of sources partly assessed. References complete and comply with the Guide to Referencing. No errors. |
| 70-79 | Very good presentation that conforms to guidelines and provides a reasoned argument using a logical and concise structure that displays a lucid and articulate style, using appropriate tools for the audience and discipline. | Work based on a comprehensive understanding of appropriate knowledge of ruminant nutrition for Level 7. No omissions. Clear evidence of knowledge derived from outside the teaching programme. Publishable quality with moderate editing | Strong argument based on robust analysis and evaluation of knowledge, and concepts that relate chosen topic at level 7. Very good practical application that will be of major benefit ruminant nutrition. | Very good use of reliable, appropriate sources for Level 7, including peer reviewed journals, many selected independently. References are complete and comply with the Guide to Referencing with no errors. |
| 60-69 | Good presentation that conforms to guidelines and provides a clear argument using a logical structure that displays a fluent style, using appropriate tools that are correctly applied for the audience and discipline. | Work based on a good understanding of appropriate knowledge of ruminant nutrition for Level 7. No significant omissions. Some evidence of knowledge derived from outside the teaching programme. | Sound argument based on good analysis, evaluation of knowledge and concepts relating to the topic at Level 7. Good evidence of practical application will improve ruminant nutrition. | Very good use of reliable, appropriate sources for Level 7, with some selected independently. References are complete and mainly comply with the Guide to Referencing, with minor omissions or errors. |
| 50-59 | Presentation conforms to the guidelines with few errors. Accuracy and clarity of expression could be improved by minor changes to structure and/or style. Appropriate tools that are correctly applied for the audience or discipline. | Work based on a good understanding of appropriate knowledge of ruminant nutrition for Level 7. No significant omissions. Limited to knowledge derived from the teaching programme. | Work partly descriptive, but logical. An evaluation based on analysis and knowledge of basic concepts that relate to the chosen topic at Level 7. Some evidence of practical application that may assist in improving ruminant nutrition. | Good use of reliable, appropriate sources for level 7, with some selected independently. References are complete and largely comply with the Guide to Referencing with minor omissions or recurring presentational errors. |
| 40-49 | Presentation largely conform to guidelines, but has moderate errors. Accuracy and clarity of expression moderately compromised by poor structure and/or style. Tools largely appropriate but may be inconsistently applied for the audience or discipline.
|
Work based on a superficial understanding of appropriate knowledge of ruminant nutrition for Level 7. Limited to knowledge derived from the teaching programme | Work mainly descriptive, and a superficial argument based on limited analysis and evaluation of knowledge related to topic at Level 7. Limited evidence of a practical application that could improve ruminant nutrition. | Some use of relevant sources for Level 7, but not sourced independently. References mostly complete and mainly comply with the Guide to Referencing, but significant omissions or recurring presentational errors. |
| 30-39 | Presentation doesn’t conform to guidelines. Accuracy and clarity of expression severely compromised by poor structure and/or style. Tools inappropriate and/or incorrectly applied for the audience or discipline. | Work based on an incomplete understanding of knowledge of ruminant nutrition for Level 7. | Work descriptive, with little, irrelevant or illogical argument, based on limited understanding of knowledge of the topic at Level 7. Limited evidence of application that could improve ruminant nutrition. | Little use of relevant sources for Level 7, but indiscriminately selected or largely unreliable or irrelevant; too much reliance on non-peer reviewed sources. Key reference information is largely present and understandable, but has significant presentation errors. |
| 20-29 | Presentation doesn’t conform to guidelines. Illogical structure and/or immature and incoherent style. Tools inappropriate and/or incorrectly applied for the audience or discipline. | Work based on a limited understanding
of knowledge of ruminant nutrition, with significant errors or omissions |
Work descriptive with no argument and based on a basic understanding of knowledge of the chosen topic at Level 7. Limited evidence of application that is unlikely to improve ruminant nutrition. | Minimal evidence of reading required for Level 7. Sources used are largely inappropriate or irrelevant to the task. References are mainly incomplete and confused. |
| 10-19 | Limited grasp of communication skills. No structure and immature and incoherent style. Tools inappropriate and incorrectly applied for the audience or discipline. | Work suggests limited awareness of knowledge of ruminant nutrition, but largely wrong, contradictory or unsupported. | Work suggests some basic understanding of knowledge of the topic at Level 7, but largely wrong, contradictory or unsupported. No evidence of application that could improve ruminant nutrition. | Very limited evidence of wider reading at level 7. No meaningful attempt at referencing. |
| 0-9 | No evidence of academic conventions or the communication skills required at Level 7 | No evidence of knowledge and understanding of ruminant nutrition. | No evidence of knowledge and understanding of the chosen topic, or application that could improve ruminant nutrition. | No evidence of reading. No attempt at referencing. |
Wordcount / Presentation Duration
- Students are required to keep within the specified word / page limit or presentation duration and include a word count or page numbering as applicable.
- The portion of an assignment that exceeds a word / page limit / presentation duration will not be marked.
Assignment Submission Checklist
- Uploaded the digital copy of the assignment to The Learning Hub.
- Checked that the uploaded digital copy is the correct file.
- Check you have received your e-mail receipt to confirm successful assignment upload; If you do not receive a receipt within 30 minutes of uploading your work, please contact the Assessment Office (01952 815058 or assignments@harper-adams.ac.uk).
- Retained a digital back-up of the assignment; Digital files must be retained for the duration of your studies.
- Remember you can upload and replace an earlier submission up to the deadline.
Assignment Return
Your feedback will be returned through GradeMark. To view feedback, please return to the drop-in box on your module. Instructions on how to access feedback through GradeMark can be found under the “Student Information” tab on the front page of The Learning Hub. As well as the grade/mark, you should also receive feedback (which may be typed or spoken) on your assignment. If the written feedback provided is unclear you are advised to contact the module leader/module tutor to provide clarification.
Your marked assignment should be returned by the date stated on the brief. If this will not be possible, the module leader/module tutor will advise students of the expected return date. If you do not receive your mark/feedback by this date, please ask your Course Tutor to contact the relevant Head of Department to advise them of this delay.
Penalties
Work submitted after the published deadline will be subject to a mark penalty unless there are approved, documented, mitigating circumstances. The penalties for late or non-submission are shown below:
- Student work submitted up to five working days later than the published date/time will be subject to the final mark being capped at 40%.
- Student work submitted AFTER00 on the fifth working day will be awarded a grade of zero. After uploading your digital copy, please retain the emailed receipt(s) which you should receive confirming that your assignment has been successfully uploaded.
- For group assignments, on time submission is the collective responsibility of the group. If a group assignment is submitted after the published deadline, ALL members of the group will be subject to the penalty shown above. All group members should ensure that they have a plan, agreed in advance, in the event that a nominated individual is unable to complete the submission by the stated deadline.
- Submitted work that does not use the specified file format may not be marked if the file cannot be accessed.
- Turnitin may not allow upload of files that are only stored in the cloud (e.g. OneDrive). Please download to local storage (e.g. USB, laptop hard drive etc) before uploading work.
- Failure to upload or uploading the digital copy after the deadline will result in a mark penalty. Early submission, is strongly
Reassessment Queries
- Please be aware that module tutors on occasion are away from the University for extended periods. If you have a query about the reassessment task, please attempt to contact the module tutor in the first instance. Please note that if you email your tutor, you may receive an out of office reply that directs you to contact another member of staff with your query. If you are unable to contact your tutor or nominated alternate contact, please send your request for assistance to assignments@harper-adams.ac.uk who will forward your request to an appropriate member of academic staff.
Timeline and Approval
Date of assignment launch to students: Monday 13th October 2025
Feedback and grades will be returned by: Thurs 15th Jan 2026 (available to view through Grade Mark)
Assignment brief moderated by (print name): A.M. Mackenzie
Can’t Complete Your Level-7 Ruminant Nutrition Assignment on Time?
Many students find it tough to complete their A7080 Recent Advances in Ruminant Nutrition Individual Assignment because the topics are technical, research-heavy, and require strong Level-7 critical thinking. But don’t worry—Ireland Assignments is here to support you. We provide expert harper adams university assignment help with plagiarism free and 100% human written. You can also check our Animal Nutrition Assignment Sample first, so you know exactly what kind of quality we deliver. If you need a custom-written A7080 report, you can order anytime—our work is 100% human-written, plagiarism-free, well-researched, and prepared specifically for your chosen topic, helping you score higher with confidence.
