In vitro digestibility techniques to predict apparent total tract energy digestibility of wheat in grower pigs12
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In vitro digestibility techniques have been developed to predict the apparent total tract digestibility (ATTD) of energy and DE content of mixed diets and feedstuffs including barley grain in swine. However, the techniques have not been tested properly for their accuracy in predicting the variation in ATTD of energy and DE content within wheat grain. The objectives were 1) to compare two 3-step in vitro digestibility techniques with either cellulase (IVD-CEL) or Viscozyme (a multienzyme complex to digest fiber; Novozymes, Bagsvaerd, Denmark; IVD-VIS) as the third step, and differing in the amount of enzymes used and the duration of digestion, for their accuracy in predicting ATTD of energy and DM of wheat in grower pigs; and 2) to develop equations to predict ATTD of energy of different batches of wheat. Wheat grain samples (n = 20) with a wide range in quality were collected; the ADF and CP content ranged from 3.3 to 6.2% and from 11.2 to 20.8% (DM basis), respectively. The ATTD of energy was determined using barrows (n = 60, 30.7 +/- 4.7 kg of initial BW) in 2 periods with 6 observations per sample, and ranged from 73.3 to 84.5%. In IVD-CEL, 1 g of ground wheat was digested sequentially in digestion solutions containing pepsin (10 mg/36.5 mL) for 6 h, pancreatin (150 mg/54.5 mL) for 18 h, and cellulase (75 mg/55.5 mL) for 24 h. In IVD-VIS, 0.5 g of ground wheat sample was digested sequentially in solutions containing pepsin (25 mg/36.5 mL) for 2 h, 3 mL of pancreatin (100 mg/54.5 mL) for 6 h, and Viscozyme (0.5 mL/65.3 mL) for 18 h. The in vitro energy and DM digestibility ranged from 79.8 to 91.0% and from 82.0 to 91.5% for IVD-CEL, and ranged from 76.2 to 87.0% and from 79.1 to 89.4% for IVD-VIS, respectively. The R(2) between ATTD of energy and in vitro DM and energy digestibility for IVD-VIS (0.82 and 0.73, respectively) was greater than for IVD-CEL (0.55 and 0.54, respectively). The equation y = 1.05x - 8.85 using the in vitro DM digestibility value from IVD-VIS can predict the ATTD of the energy of wheat in swine with an SE of prediction of 1.2. The relationship between in vitro DM digestibility and grain characteristics such as ADF was stronger for the IVD-VIS than for the IVD-CEL technique (R(2) = 0.89 vs. 0.70). In conclusion, the IVD-VIS, but not the IVD-CEL, technique can accurately (R(2) = 0.82) predict the ATTD of energy in wheat in grower pigs. Therefore, the IVD-VIS technique might be useful as the reference analysis to calibrate analytical equipment to predict the ATTD of energy rapidly in wheat.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".