Nutritional, hormonal, and environmental effects on colostrum in sows1
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is widely recognized that an early and high intake of colostrum is a major determinant of piglet survival during the early suckling period. The production of colostrum, however, is very variable among sows and the factors affecting this variability are not well known. Factors such as number of parity and genotype do seem to influence colostrum yield and composition. The endocrine status of the sow also affects the process of colostrogenesis and changes in the sow endocrine status can have an impact on quantity and quality of colostrum produced. Indeed, induction of parturition seems to play a role. Nutrition is undoubtedly a major factor that could be used as a tool to alter colostrum composition, with fat content being the most affected. Feed ingredients, such as yeast extracts and fermented liquid feed, were recently shown to alter colostrum composition, yet more research is needed to substantiate these effects. Very few data are available on the influence of environment on colostrum production; results suggest that heat stress has negative effects on colostrum composition. Considering the importance of colostrum for the survival, growth, and immune resistance of piglets, it is obvious that research on the development of new management systems is necessary to improve yield and composition of colostrum.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".