Optimum ratio of standardized ileal digestible tryptophan to lysine for piglets
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Two experiments were conducted to determine optimal standardized ileal digestible (SID) tryptophan:lysine ratio for piglets using growth performance and plasma urea N as response criteria.In Experiment 1, piglets were fed 6 diets with 8.5, 9.5, 10.5, 11.5, 12.5 or 13.5 g • kg -1 SID lysine to estimate lysine requirement.In Experiment 2, piglets were fed 6 diets with 9.2 g • kg -1 SID lysine, and 0.178, 0.182, 0.196, 0.216, 0.227 or 0.236 SID trytophan:lysine to estimate optimal tryptophan:lysine ratio.The SID lysine requirement was estimated to be 10.2 g • kg -1 .Response criteria measured were unaffected by SID tryptophan:lysine ratio, implying that the diets fed were not deficient in tryptophan.In conclusion, the SID lysine requirement for the piglets was close to the recommendation by NRC (1998; 10.1 g • kg -1 ), but not NRC (2012; 12.3 g • kg -1 ).The optimal SID tryptophan:lysine ratio of the piglets was either equal to or less than 0.178.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".