MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2099153871 · doi:10.2527/jas.2009-2404

The effect of dentition on feeding development in piglets and on their growth and behavior after weaning

2010· article· en· W2099153871 on OpenAlexaff
Anita L. Tucker, I.J.H. Duncan, Suzanne T. Millman, Robert Friendship, Tina M. Widowski

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Animal Science · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicAnimal Behavior and Welfare Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWeaningPremolarAnimal scienceMaxillaDentitionMandible (arthropod mouthpart)OcclusionMedicineOrthodonticsDentistryBiologyInternal medicineMolar

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objectives of this study were to determine the effects of dentition on feed-oriented behavior and feed consumption before weaning at 28 d, and whether premolar eruption or occlusion at the time of weaning influenced postweaning growth or behavior. Over 3 trials, 24 litters of Yorkshire piglets (n = 233) were provided with creep feed marked with 1% chromic oxide on d 5. Dental exams were performed on d 2, 6, 9, 13, 16, 20, 23, and 27. Fecal samples were visually assessed for feed consumption (via fecal color) on the same day as dental exams, beginning on d 6. The duration of time spent at, and frequency of visits to, the creep feeder were determined from continuous video recordings on d 7, 10, 14, 17, 21, and 24 for 6 h/d (0700 to 1000 h, 1300 to 1600 h). After weaning, behavior was recorded every 5 min for three 2-h time periods (0600 to 0800 h, 1100 to 1300 h, and 1600 to 1800 h) on d 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12. Piglets younger than 17 d with their premolars erupted and occluded spent less time at the creep feeder and visited it less often than piglets without their premolars erupted and occluded [duration: p(3) (premolar position 3 on maxilla), d 7 (P = 0.005); p(4) (premolar position 4 on mandible), d 7 (P < 0.0001), d 10 (P = 0.003); p(4 )(premolar position 4 on maxilla), d 17 (P = 0.012); occlusion, d 7 (P < 0.0001), d 10 (P = 0.0004); visits: p(3), d 7 (P < 0.0001); p(4), d 7 (P < 0.0001), d 10 (P = 0.001); p(3 )(premolar position 3 on mandible), d 14 (P = 0.037); p(4), d 17 (P = 0.024); occlusion, d 7 (P < 0.0001), d 10 (P = 0.003)]. By d 21 of age, this trend reversed such that piglets with premolars erupted and occluded spent more time at the feeder and visited it more frequently [duration: p(3), d 24 (P = 0.025); p(4), d 24 (P = 0.0005); occlusion, d 21 (P = 0.001), d 24 (P = 0.0001); visits: p(3), d 21 (P = 0.0002), d 24 (P < 0.0001); p(4), d 24 (P = 0.0002); occlusion, d 21 (P < 0.0001), d 24 (P < 0.0001)]. The percentages of piglets with positive fecal scores were 0, 1.4, 4.6, 8.0, 29.0, 44.9, and 60.6% on d 7, 10, 14, 17, 21, 24, and 27, respectively (P < 0.0001 between each day). No associations were found between the eruption or occlusion of premolars and feed consumption before weaning (P > 0.05), and no dental measures influenced growth rates (P > 0.10) or behavior (P > 0.10) after weaning. A more precise method may be necessary for detecting associations between dental eruption and feed consumption. However, the behavioral results indicate that, before weaning at 28 d, younger piglets are inhibited from feeding when their premolars first erupt, whereas older piglets with a more advanced dentition are more attracted to feed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.686
Threshold uncertainty score0.193

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.286 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations11
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Animal ScienceSame topicAnimal Behavior and Welfare StudiesFrench-language works237,207