MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1999725863 · doi:10.4141/a04-025

Performance and carcass characteristics of growing-finishing pigs fed barley-based diets supplemented with Linpro (extruded whole flaxseed and peas) or soybean meal

2004· article· en· W1999725863 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
P. A. Thacker, V. J. Racz, H. W. Soita

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Animal Science · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Nutrition and Physiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCrossbreedSoybean mealDry matterAnimal scienceFeed conversion ratioSireMealBiologyLitterRapeseedFood scienceBody weightAgronomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this experiment was to determine the effects of feeding graded levels of Linpro (a 50:50 combination of extruded full-fat flax seed and peas) on pig performance and carcass traits, particularly the fatty acid composition of backfat. Eighty crossbred pigs (Camborough 15 Line female × Canabred sire, Pig Improvement Canada Ltd., Airdrie, AB) weighing an average of 22.7 ± 2.2 kg were assigned on the basis of sex, weight and litter to one of five dietary treatments in a 5 × 2 factorial arrangement (treatment × sex). The experimental diets were based on barley and soybean meal and contained 0, 7.5, 15, 22.5 or 30% Linpro during the growing period (22.7–69.7 kg) and 0, 6, 12, 18 or 24% Linpro during the finishing period (69.7–111.1 kg). Digestibility coefficients for dry matter were not significantly affected by incorporation of Linpro in the diet. Digestibility coefficients for crude protein (P = 0.01) and gross energy (P = 0.04) exhibited a cubic effect due to Linpro incorporation with the highest digestibility coefficients observed for pigs fed 7.5% Linpro. Over the entire experimental period (22.7–111.1 kg), daily gain was affected both linearly (P = 0.02) and quadratically (P = 0.04) by Linpro inclusion. The most rapid gains were obtained by pigs fed 7.5% Linpro (6% in finisher), while pigs fed 30% Linpro (24% in finisher) gained weight the slowest. Feed intake was not significantly affected by Linpro inclusion, while feed conversion exhibited a quadratic effect (P = 0.02) with pigs fed the highest and lowest levels o f Linpro showing the poorest feed conversion. Linpro inclusion, had no significant effects on carcass traits including slaughter weight, carcass weight, dressing percent, carcass value index, lean yield, loin fat or loin lean. Inclusion of 30% Linpro (24% in finisher) significantly (P < 0.05) increased the levels of linolenic acid in backfat and this increase could provide significant health benefits for consumers of pork. Linpro would appear to be an acceptable alternative to soybean meal as a protein supplement for use in growing-finishing swine diets and can be incorporated at levels as high as 22.5% in the grower period and 18% in the finisher period without detrimental affects on pig performance. Key words: Swine, extrusion, flax, peas, digestibility, growth, backfat

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.904
Threshold uncertainty score0.355

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.196 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations26
Published2004
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Animal ScienceSame topicAnimal Nutrition and PhysiologyFrench-language works237,207