Effect of mineral source and mannan oligosaccharide supplements on zinc and copper digestibility in growing pigs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aimed to compare the effects of organic (proteinate) and inorganic (sulphate) copper (Cu) and zinc (Zn) supplements, in presence or absence of a mannan oligosaccharide (MOS) supplement, on mineral solubility and digestibility in pigs. Twenty-eight barrows (25 ± 4 kg) assigned randomly to four treatment groups were fed a corn-wheat-soya bean meal diet with 10 mg/kg of Cu and 100 mg/kg of Zn supplied as organic or inorganic supplement, and supplemented or not with 0.1% MOS. After an adaptation period, total faeces and urine were collected for a period of 6-7 days. Pigs were then euthanatised and digesta from ileum and caecum were collected. Apparent digestibility was calculated in ileum and caecum using titanium dioxide. The organic mineral supplement improved total (faecal) digestibility and retained/ingested ratio of Cu (p < 0.05) while reducing apparent digestibility of Zn in the ileum (p < 0.05) without effect on total digestibility of Zn. Solubilities of Cu and Zn in liquid fraction of ileum and caecum were not affected by mineral sources. Although MOS supplement increased Cu solubility in the ileum (p < 0.05), it had no effect on digestibility of Zn and Cu in ileum, caecum and faeces, retained/ingested ratio of Zn and Cu, or pH and volatile fatty acid concentration in ileal and caecal digesta. In conclusion, organic mineral supplement improved total digestibility and retained/ingested ratio of Cu in pigs but this cannot be attributed to its solubility in ileal and caecal digesta. The MOS supplement did not interfere with digestibility or dietary utilisation of Zn and Cu in pigs fed above the Zn and Cu requirements.
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) | 0.000 | 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".