Energy and nutrient digestibilities in wheat dried distillers' grains with solubles fed to growing pigs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The aim of this study was to characterize the nutritional profile and to determine the digestibilities of nutrients in wheat‐based dried distillers' grains with solubles (DDGS) fed to growing pigs. Six ileal cannulated barrows individually housed in metabolism crates were fed experimental diets which consisted of a basal wheat‐based diet or the basal diet with wheat replaced by 400 g kg −1 mixed wheat or winter wheat DDGS in a replicated 3 × 3 Latin square design. Ileal digesta and fecal samples were collected for determining apparent ileal (AID) and apparent total tract digestibilities (ATTD), respectively. The contents of proximate components and amino acids in DDGS were about three times higher than in wheat. The AID and ATTD of dry matter, nitrogen and energy were lower ( P < 0.05) in DDGS compared with wheat. The DDGS samples had lower ( P < 0.05) AID of amino acids compared with wheat; average values for lysine, threonine and isoleucine in DDGS were 43.8, 62.9 and 68.0%, respectively. The ileal and fecal digestible energy content in DDGS averaged 9.7 ± 1.18 and 13.5 ± 0.61 MJ kg −1 , respectively. Respective values for wheat were 13.3 ± 0.52 and 14.6 ± 0.22 MJ kg −1 and both were higher ( P < 0.05) than in DDGS. Copyright © 2005 Society of Chemical Industry
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 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".