MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2157554637 · doi:10.2527/jas.2008-1739

In vitro digestibility techniques to predict apparent total tract energy digestibility of wheat in grower pigs12

2009· article· en· W2157554637 on OpenAlexaff
P. R. Regmi, N.S. Ferguson, R. T. Zijlstra

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Animal Science · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Nutrition and Physiology
Canadian institutionsNutreco (Canada)University of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDigestion (alchemy)CellulasePepsinFood scienceWheat grainChemistryAnimal scienceAgronomyBiologyCelluloseChromatographyEnzymeBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 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)0.001
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 score0.817
Threshold uncertainty score0.200

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.247 · 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

Citations68
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Animal ScienceSame topicAnimal Nutrition and PhysiologyFrench-language works237,207