Determination of the digestible energy and prediction of the net energy content of toasted and non-toasted canola meals from <i>Brassica junceae</i> and <i>Brassica napus</i> in growing pigs by the total faecal collection and the indigestible marker method
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The study aimed to compare the digestible and net energy (DE and NE) contents of three canola meals (CM) toasted (95°C) or not after desolventization from yellow Brassica junceae (YBJ) and yellow and black Brassica napus (YBN and BBN) in growing pigs. A basal diet and six CM-based diets (2/3 basal diet and 1/3 CM) supplemented with acid-insoluble ash (indigestible marker) were prepared. The growing pigs (28 kg; six per treatment) were kept in metabolic cages for 18 d and their faeces were collected for the last 10 d. The digestibilities and DE content of the CM were determined based on the total faecal excretion and the indigestible marker method. NE was estimated with a prediction equation. The DE and NE contents of the YBN meal (3.98 and 2.73 Mcal kg -1 DM) were higher (P = 0.007) than that of the YBJ (3.76 and 2.59 Mcal kg -1 DM) and BBN (3.64 and 2.43 Mcal kg -1 DM) meals. Toasting had no effect (P > 0.05) on the DE and NE contents. Inconsistent values were obtained with the indigestible marker, as compared with the total faecal collection method. In conclusion, YBN canola presents the highest energy content, and toasting of CM does not affect its energy values in growing pigs.Key words: Canola meal, growing pigs, toasting, digestible energy, net energy
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".