Use of supplementary tryptophan to modify the behavior of pigs1
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Three experiments were conducted to investigate the short-term use of supplementary Trp on the behavior of grow/finish pigs. Three levels of dietary Trp were used, representing the standard requirement for growth (control), twice (2x), and 4 times (4x) the control amount. In Exp. 1, pigs were fed the diets for 7 d, during which observations were made of their general behavior (time budget), aggression within the group of familiar pigs, and response to a startling auditory stimulus. Behavior effects were evident during the period of supplementation for both the 2x and 4x diets. During the treatment period, pigs fed supplemental Trp spent more time lying (P = 0.04) and less time eating (P = 0.05) than pigs fed the control diet. Although the response of the animals to the startling stimulus was to become alert and stand, similar behavioral effects caused by supplemental Trp also were evident after the startling stimulus (P < 0.01). Based on these observations, the subsequent studies retained the same dietary levels of Trp and incorporated a 3-d feeding of diets before behavior testing. In Exp. 2, pigs were fed the experimental diets for 3 d before being regrouped with unfamiliar pigs on the same diet. Subsequent aggression was affected by Trp supplementation, in that high levels of dietary Trp decreased the total duration of fighting by approximately 50% (P = 0.03). Supplemental Trp had no effect on the number of fights, and there were no differences between the 2 levels of supplemental Trp on any behavior. In Exp. 3, pigs were exposed to specific handling tests on the farm and meat quality assessments after being fed the experimental diets for 3 d. There were no differences among dietary treatments for any of the meat quality characteristic variables measured. The only behavioral or physiological difference observed among the treatments was a slower movement of pigs fed the 4x Trp treatment than control or 2x Trp-fed pigs in a minimal-forced situation (P = 0.04). Response to confinement on a scale, an electric prod, and movement in general did not differ among treatments. High levels of Trp may result in animals avoiding stressful situations if possible, but they seem to have no effect on responses to stressors that animals may experience in a forced situation.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".