Effects of dietary energy and lysine intake during late gestation and lactation on blood metabolites, hormones, milk compositions and reproductive performance in primiparous sows
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The effects of energy and lysine intake during late gestation and lactation on the reproductive performance of primiparous sows were evaluated using 36 gilts. Sows were allocated to six dietary treatments according to a 3 × 2 factorial arrangement and each treatment had six replicates. Three energy levels [low (EL), medium (EM) and high (EH)] and two lysine levels [low (LL) and high (HL)] were used. Gilts with HL intake had more weight (P = 0.004) and backfat thickness (P = 0.047) gain during gestation. Similar changes in sow body conditions were observed during lactation. HL intake resulted in higher litter birth weight (P = 0.001), weaning weight (P < 0.001) and growth rate (P < 0.001) and shortened wean-to-estrus interval (P= 0.001). Energy intake influenced the fat and lactose content while lysine intake influenced the total solids and protein content in milk and colostrum. Gilts with HL had higher insulin and lower creatinine levels during post farrowing and weaning, while triglyceride concentration at weaning increased with increasing of energy intake. The basal and pulses of LH were also influenced by lysine intake. In conclusion, higher lysine intake than those recommended by National Research Council (1998) could improve performance during late gestation and lactation in primiparous sows. Key words: Energy, lysine, gestation, lactation, sows
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".