Performance, Digestibility and Carcass Characteristics of Growing/Finishing Pigs Fed Barley-Based Diets Supplemented with an Extruded or Unextruded Blend of Peas and Canola Seed or Meal
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Seventy-two crossbred pigs weighing an average of 41.5 kg were assigned on the basis of sex, weight and litter to one of four dietary treatments in a factorial (4 treatments 2 sexes) arrangement. The control diet was based on barley and soybean meal while the experimental treatments consisted of diets in which a portion of the dietary protein was supplied by 20% of a 50:50 blend of extruded (130C for 20 to 25 sec) peas and full-fat canola seed, 20% of a 50:50 blend of unextruded peas and full-fat canola seed or a diet containing 10% peas, 6% canola meal and 4% canola oil (to equal the level of canola oil provided by 10% whole canola seed). Digestibility coefficients for dry matter, crude protein and gross energy were significantly higher (p<0.05) for the control diet than for the other three diets. Extrusion produced no beneficial effects (p>0.05) on nutrient digestibility and there were no differences in digestibility between the diet based on intact canola seed compared with the diet containing canola meal and oil. Choice of protein supplement had no significant effects on gain, feed intake or feed conversion during the grower or finisher phases and over the entire experimental period. Extrusion of the pea-canola blend produced no beneficial effects on pig performance as the performance of pigs fed either the extruded or unextruded blend of peas and canola seed was similar. In addition, the performance of pigs fed diets containing intact canola seed was similar to that of pigs fed canola meal and oil. Castrates gained faster and consumed more feed than gilts (p<0.05). However, their feed conversion was poorer than that of the gilts during the finisher period. There were no significant differences in carcass traits between pigs fed the control and any of the experimental treatments. Extrusion had no effect on carcass traits and the carcasses of pigs fed canola meal and oil did not differ from those of pigs fed whole canola seed. Castrates had a significantly lower dressing percentage, lower estimated lean yield but greater loin fat depth than gilts (p<0.05). The results of this experiment indicate that peas in combination with canola seed or canola meal are an acceptable alternative to soybean meal as a protein supplement for use in growing-finishing swine diets. Extrusion did not appear to have any beneficial effects on the nutritional value of the canola seed-pea blend as nutrient digestibility, growth performance and carcass traits were similar for pigs fed the unextruded blend of peas and canola seed compared with the extruded product. Since the process adds to the cost of the raw products, its use is unlikely to be economical. (
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".