MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2137252684 · doi:10.1017/s1751731109990917

Methionine-hydroxy analogue was found to be significantly less bioavailable compared to dl-methionine for protein deposition in growing pigs

2009· article· en· W2137252684 on OpenAlexaff
Anna K. Shoveller, Soenke Moehn, M. Rademacher, John K Htoo, Ronald O. Ball

Bibliographic record

Venueanimal · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Nutrition and Physiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMethionineBioavailabilityChemistryAnimal scienceMealPhenylalanineAmino acidBiochemistryFood scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

When methionine (Met) is limiting in swine diets, it is commonly supplemented by using anhydrous dl-methionine (DLM, 99% purity) or liquid dl-methionine-hydroxy analogue free acid (MHA-FA, 88% purity). The objective of this experiment was to test the null hypothesis that the bioavailability of DLM and MHA-FA were not different for growing pigs, using the indicator amino acid (AA) (phenylalanine, Phe) oxidation (IAAO) method in a slope-ratio assay. Six barrows (mean BW during study: 21.1 kg) received seven dietary treatments with all pigs receiving all diets in random order at an intake of 95 g/kg BW0.75. The basal diet (BD) contained analyzed content of 15.1% CP, 0.20% Met, 0.73% Phe and all other AA in excess of requirement. The BD was supplemented with three graded levels of DLM or MHA-FA on an equimolar basis. Dietary treatments only varied in Met content and included: (i) BD, (ii) BD + 0.034% DLM, (iii) BD + 0.054% DLM, (iv) BD + 0.086% DLM, (v) BD + 0.029% MHA-FA, (vi) BD + 0.078% MHA-FA and (vii) BD + 0.107% MHA-FA, as analyzed. Indicator AA oxidation was determined during 4 h studies, where pigs were fed half-hourly meals each equal to 1/32 of their daily feed allowance. Each meal was mixed with 258.7 kBq (s.e. 2.6) of l-[1-14C]Phe with a prime of 3.5 times the half-hourly dose added to the first meal. The slope of the decrease in IAAO calculated by linear regression analysis was greater (P = 0.012) for DLM supplementation (9.87 ± 1.450 per g, 1.488 ± 0.215% per mmol) than for MHA-FA (6.48 ± 0.89 per g, 1.107 ± 0.152% per mmol). The ratio of slopes indicated a bioavailability of MHA-FA on a product basis, relative to DLM, of 65.7%. Bioavailability on an equimolar Met basis, calculated from the ratio of the slopes was 74.4% for MHA-FA, relative to DLM. In conclusion, these results indicate that the metabolic bioavailability of MHA-FA for growing pigs is appreciably lower than that of DLM on both an equimolar and a product basis.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.765
Threshold uncertainty score0.369

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.222 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations18
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueanimalSame topicAnimal Nutrition and PhysiologyFrench-language works237,207