The Digestive Utilization of Iron and Copper in the Fattening Swine Organism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The previous results have shown that the pork meat may become a part of a dietetical nutrition, because the pork meat is a superior source of protein, the best source of thiamine, a good source of iron and zinc, lower as calories, less lipids and an ideal ratio between polyunsaturated and saturated fat acids.\nThe aim of this study was to evaluate the influence over the bioproductive performances of fattening swine, also the evolution of the contained of iron and copper in blood, liver, fat, muscles, in the conditions in which during the finisher period iron and copper marked with radioactive isotope 56Fe and 64Cu have been used. The bioproductive performance registered by the fattening swine have proved that the optimal levels of iron are of 60 mg/kg compound feed in the first stage of fattening and of 40 mg/kg in the second stage, respectively the copper’s level is of 4 mg/kg in the first stage and 3 mg/kg in the second stage. The established values obtained experimentally demonstrates an accumulation of radioactive iron and copper bigger in liver, blood and muscles. Regarding the organoleptical properties, the colour of the meat at these levels of iron and copper considered optimal, had the corresponding values of a quality meat (2.8-3.0 according to the Canadian standard).
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".