Energy intake and milk production in mink <i>(MUSTELA vison</i> )‐effect of litter size
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Energy intake and milk production were measured in 12 mink dams raising litters of 3, 6 and 9 kits one to four weeks post partum by means of balance experiments and measurements of milk intake of the kits by the water isotope dilution technique. The dams were fed ad libitum on a conventional wet mink diet (DM: 323 g/kg; CP: 173 g/kg; ME: 4.4 MJ/kg). Milk samples collected from dams with corresponding litter sizes and lactation weeks, and body composition of kits nursed by these dams, were analysed for content of DM, ash, N and fat. The ME and drinking water consumption were higher in dams nursing 9 kits than in dams nursing 3 kits. The N and water balances as well as the live weight of dams were not affected by litter size. Daily milk production was higher in dams nursing 9 kits than in dams nursing 3 kits. The DM, N and fat content of the milk increased during lactation, but were not affected by litter size. Individual kit live weight was higher in litters of 3 than in litters of 6 and 9 kits four weeks post partum. The DM and fat content of the kits were lowest in kits from litters of 9 kits, whereas these kits had the highest protein content. Daily ME for maintenance of kits and the efficiency of utilisation of ME in milk for body gain were estimated to 356 kJ/kg0.75, kp approximately 0.53 and kf approximately 0.71, respectively. In conclusion, daily milk production increased with increasing litter size, but not in proportion to the number of kits, indicating that milk production limits the growth rate of the young. In the fourth week of lactation, milk production was not different between dams nursing 6 or 9 kits, indicating a maximum capacity.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 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".