Effect of dietary n-3 fatty acids (fish oils) on boar reproduction and semen quality1
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of dietary supplementation with different fish oils (rich in PUFA) vs. hydrogenated animal fat (SFA) on semen production and quality, fatty acid composition, and preservation properties in boars under controlled and commercial conditions. In Exp. 1 (in a research station), 44 boars, allocated to 4 dietary treatments, received daily 2.5 kg of basal diet with a supplement of 1) 62 g of hydrogenated animal fat (AF, n = 12); 2) 60 g of menhaden oil containing 18% docosahexanoic acid (DHA) and 15% eicosapentanoic acid (EPA; MO, n = 11); 3) 60 g of tuna oil containing 33% DHA and 6.5% EPA (TO, n = 11); and 4) 60 g of menhaden oil and 2 mg/kg of biotin (MO+B, n = 10). Biotin is a critical factor in the elongation of PUFA. Semen was collected according to 3 successive phases: phase 1 (twice per week for 4 wk); phase 2 (daily collection for 2 wk); and phase 3 (twice per week for 10 wk). Experiment 2 was conducted in commercial conditions; 222 boars were randomly allocated to AF, MO, and TO treatments. Semen was collected twice weekly over a 6-mo period. All diets were balanced to be iso-energetic and provided an equivalent of 989 mg of vitamin E per day. Classical measurements of sperm quantity and quality were done for both experiments. Experiment 1 showed, after 28 wk of supplementation, a massive transfer of n-3 PUFA into sperm from boars fed fish oil diets (MO and TO). No differences were observed among dietary treatments for libido (P > 0.30), sperm production (P > 0.20), or percentage of motile cell (P > 0.20). Unexpectedly, MO+B diet reduced the percentage of normal sperm compared with the other treatments (P < 0.03). In conclusion, although it modified the fatty acid composition of sperm, supplementation of boars with dietary fish oils, rich in long chain n-3 fatty acids, did not influence semen production or quality postejaculation.
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) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".