Standardized ileal digestibility of amino acids in alfalfa meal, sugar beet pulp, and wheat bran compared to wheat and protein ingredients for growing pigs1
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A total of 11 (8 + 3 for replacement) barrows with an initial BW of 23 kg and fitted with a simple T-cannula at the distal ileum were used in 2 consecutive experiments (Exp. 1 and Exp. 2) to determine the standardized ileal digestibility (SID) of AA in 7 assay feed ingredients according to 2 consecutive duplicated 4 × 4 Latin square designs. In Exp. 1, 3 corn starch-based assay diets were formulated to contain 170 g CP/kg (as-fed basis) from either soybean meal (SBM), canola meal (CM), or meat-and-bone meal (MBM) and 1 assay diet that contained 136 g CP/kg (as-fed basis) from wheat as commonly used feed ingredients for pigs. In Exp. 2, the pigs were fed 4 assay diets formulated to contain 170 g CP/kg (as-fed basis) from either the same SBM as in Exp. 1 or a combination of this SBM and alfalfa meal (AM), sugar beet pulp (SB), or wheat bran (WB) to compare the SID of AA in these feed ingredients with those used in Exp. 1. The SID of AA in CM was lower compared to SBM (P < 0.05) with intermediate values for MBM and wheat. Among fiber rich feed ingredients, SID values were lower in SB compared to WB (P < 0.05) with intermediate values for AM. In AM, SID values ranged between 29 and 45% for Lys, Cys, Thr, and Phe and between 51 and 71% for Arg, His, Ile, Leu, Met, and Val. In SB, SID values ranged between -21 and 46% for Cys, Thr, Phe, and Val and between 51 and 61% for Arg, His, Ile, Leu, Lys, and Met. In WB, SID values were between 55 and 64% for Lys, Cys, Phe, Thr, and Val and between 68 and 80% for Arg, His, Ile, Leu, and Met. The SID values in WB, SB, and AM provided in the present study may improve diet formulation when these feed ingredients are used in diet formulation for pigs.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".