Nitrogen and energy balance in growing mink ( <i>Mustela vison</i> ) fed different levels of bacterial protein meal produced with natural gas
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this study was to estimate the effect of increasing the dietary content of bacterial protein meal (BPM) on energy and protein metabolism in growing mink kits. Sixteen male mink kits of the standard brown genotype were randomly fed one of four diets: A control (Diet I) based on high-quality fish meal, and three experimental diets in which 20% (Diet II), 40% (Diet III) and 60% (Diet IV) of the digested nitrogen (DN) was replaced with BPM. Nitrogen balance and respiration experiments (indirect calorimetry) were carried out when the animals were approximately 9.5, 14.5, 17.5, 23.5 and 28.5 weeks of age. The apparent digestibility of crude protein and energy decreased significantly with increasing dietary BPM. The retained nitrogen was 0.45, 0.54, 0.52 and 0.40 g/kg0.75 on Diets I, II, III and IV, respectively, the observed differences between diets being non-significant (p = 0.06). Heat production (HE) was between 645 and 665 kJ/kg0.75 on all diets (p = 0.78). Retained energy (RE) was approximately 150-160 kJ/kg0.75 on Diets I to III, whereas it was -11 kJ/kg0.75 on Diet IV, the differences being significant (p< 0.001). A lower feed intake and apparent digestibility of energy caused the negative RE on Diet IV. The amount of HE from oxidation of protein decreased from 32.7% on Diet I to 26.6% on Diet IV, and oxidation of fat increased from 53.8% on Diet I to 63.5% Diet IV. In conclusion, protein and energy metabolism remained unaffected when up to 40% of DN was derived from BPM.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".