Effects of eating space and availability of water in feeders on productivity and eating behavior of grower/finisher pigs.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Three experiments were conducted to determine the effects of eating space and availability of water within feeders on the productivity and behavior of growing/finishing pigs. In Exp. 1, 12 commercial feeders were classified as being either single-space (SS) or multiple-space (MS), and either as dry (D) or wet/dry (WD), resulting in two SS-D, four MS-D, three SS-WD and three MS-WD models. Each model was evaluated using four pens of 12 pigs, which were fed a mash diet throughout the growing/finishing period (25 to 106 kg). Pigs were videotaped when they were approximately 40 and 80 kg in weight to determine eating behavior. The number of feeding spaces did not affect the productivity of the pigs, but the presence of water within the feeder resulted in increases in ADFI (P < .05) and ADG (P < .05) and a reduction in carcass lean (P < .05). Pigs eating from SS feeders spent 15% less time eating than those fed from two-space feeders (P < .05), and occupancy rate for feeding spaces was increased by 75% (P < .05). The WD feeders also resulted in a reduction (17%) in eatingtime compared to D models (P < .01), and occupancy rate for WD feeders was similarly reduced (P < .05). Pigs spent 16% less time eating when they weighed approximately 80 kg than when they weighed 40 kg (P < .01). In Exp. 2, rate of eating was determined during a short test on the same 12 feeder models for both small (48 kg) and large (90 kg) pigs. Large pigs ate faster than small pigs, but eating rate was not affected by feeding space or presence of water in the feeder. In Exp. 3, eating rate was determined for small amounts of dry or wet feed. Premixing water with the feed (1:1 ratio by weight) increased eating speed (P < .01). We concluded that 12 pigs can be fed from a single-space feeder without affecting productivity. The inclusion of water within a feeder decreases time spent eating, but it increases ADFI and ADG. When pigs are small, they spend more time eating, and feeder occupancy rates are higher than when they are large.
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 | 0.001 | 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".