MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W183816133

Alternative feed ingredients for pigs.

2007· article· en· W183816133 on OpenAlexaff
H. H. Stein, Kees de Lange, Jennifer Murphy

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Nutrition and Physiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFood scienceDistillers grainsChemistryWeanlingLysineAnimal feedMethioninePolyunsaturated fatty acidSoybean mealMealAmino acidFatty acidBiologyBiochemistryRaw material
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Largely due to the demand for grains for the bio-fuel industry, the cost of feed energy will increase worldwide. Therefore, alternative energy supplying pig feed ingredients should be explored, including distillers dried grains with solubles (DDGS), field peas, wheat shorts and liquid co-products from the bio-fuel and food industry. The inclusion of DDGS in diets is limited by the fiber concentration in DDGS and for finishing pigs, also by the concentration of unsaturated fatty acids. However, most groups of swine can be fed at least 20% DDGS and sometimes, greater concentrations can be used. The concentration of available energy in DDGS is similar to corn, but some sources of DDGS have low concentrations of digestible lysine. To avoid feeding these sources, it is recommended that only DDGS that has a lysine to crude protein ratio that is greater than 2.80% is used in diets fed to swine. Field peas also contain available energy in amounts that are similar to corn and the pea protein has a high concentration of lysine, but a low concentration of methionine, cysteine, threonine, and tryptophan. Crystalline sources of these amino acids are, therefore, often required, if field peas are included in the diets. Diets fed to weanling pigs and sows may contain at least 20% field peas without changing pig performance. If the peas are extruded or micronised prior to feeding, greater concentrations may be used. Diets fed to growing-finishing pigs, may contain up to 70% field peas and no soybean meal is needed in these diets. Wheat shorts have been available for use in swine diets for many years. The available energy content of wheat shorts is lower than that of corn, but it contains more digestible amino acids and phosphorus than corn. If diets are formulated carefully, growing-finishing pig diets may contain 40% wheat shorts without compromising pig performance. Liquid feeding allows the use of liquid coproducts such as whey, whey permeate, corn distillers solubles, brewers yeast, sugar syrup, and corn steep water. The nutritional value of these co-products has been characterized and recommendations for their use in pig diets are made. These co-products are generally more variable in nutritional value, which should be considered carefully when formulating and costing swine diets.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.151

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0450.016

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.

Opus teacher head0.038
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.232 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAnimal Nutrition and Physiology→French-language works237,207→