Whole-body protein metabolism and plasma profiles of amino acids and hormones in growing barrows fed diets adequate or deficient in lysine
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Eighteen growing barrows (body weight: 26.6 ± 1.4 kg) were assigned (day 0) to one of three levels of dietary lysine: to be deficient (0.45%; L1), to achieve (0.75%; L2), or to exceed (0.98%; L3) National Research Council (NRC) (1988) lysine requirements (as-fed basis), according to a completely randomized block design. Nitrogen balance was measured over a 6-d period (days 10 to 16). On day 16, pigs were moved into respiratory chambers and received a 6-h continuous i.v. infusion of NaH13CO3 (1.66 µmol h−1 kg−1, preceded by a priming dose of 2.35 µmol kg−1) on day 17. The following day, pigs received an i.v. infusion of L-[1-13C]leucine (11.07 µmol h−1 kg−1, preceded by a priming dose of 11.07 µmol kg−1). Average daily gain and nitrogen retention increased (P < 0.10) by 36 and 20%, respectively, as dietary lysine content increased from L1 to L3. Leucine irreversible loss rate increased (P < 0.05) by 14% from diets L1 to L3, while leucine oxidation remained constant (P > 0.10) between diets. In consequence, fractional oxidation decreased (P < 0.05) by 20%, from L1 to L3. Protein synthesis and degradation increased (P < 0.05) from diets L1 to L2, but the values for the diets L2 and L3 were similar. Insulin levels tended to increase from L1 to L3 (P < 0.10), while that of triiodothyronine decreased from diets L1 to L3 (P < 0.05). Daily feed intake, nutrient digestibility, energy metabolism and plasma concentrations of insulin-like growth factor 1 and growth hormone were not affected (P > 0.10) by treatments. In conclusion, the improvement in protein gain associated with increasing lysine supplementation to achieve lysine requirement involved a general stimulation of whole-body turnover, protein synthesis being increased to a larger extent than protein degradation. Key words: Pigs, protein, metabolism, hormone, lysine, leucine
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".