MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2079125111 · doi:10.4141/a05-049

The gastrointestinal microbiota and its role in monogastric nutrition and health with an emphasis on pigs: Current understanding, possible modulations, and new technologies for ecological studies

2005· article· en· W2079125111 on OpenAlexaffvenue
J.D. Richards, Joshua Gong, C. F. M. de Lange

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Animal Science · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Nutrition and Physiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyGastrointestinal tractGut floraTemperature gradient gel electrophoresisMicrobial ecologyHost (biology)Polymerase chain reactionBacteriaZoologyMicrobiologyEcology16S ribosomal RNAGeneticsImmunologyBiochemistryGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The gastrointestinal microbiota is an incompletely defined, dynamic community of several hundred species of primarily anaerobic bacteria. Species composition and bacterial numbers vary depending on animal age, the gastrointestinal location and a variety of nutritional and environmental factors. The microbiota positively and negatively impacts host physiology and performance in many important ways. This review will examine the establishment and composition of the normal microbiota; its beneficial and deleterious effects on the host; and methods by which to modify the microbiota. In addition, recent advances in methodology using the techniques of molecular biology to measure and describe the microbiota are discussed. Finally, recent results using the polymerase chain reaction-denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis (PCR-DGGE) technique to examine the microbiota of pigs at different ages, different intestinal sites, and after treatment with selected feed additives will be described. Key words: Microbiota, gastrointestinal tract, PCR-DGGE, animal nutrition/health, 16S rRNA

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.106
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.204 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations165
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Animal ScienceSame topicAnimal Nutrition and PhysiologyFrench-language works237,207