Amino acid and fiber digestibility, intestinal bacterial profile, and enzyme activity in growing pigs fed dried distillers grains with solubles-based diets12
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study was to determine ileal AA and fiber digestibility in new-generation dried distillers grains with solubles (DDGS) derived from wheat (wDDGS), a wheat-corn blend [wcDDGS, wheat and corn were fermented in a 7:3 wt/wt ratio], or corn (cDDGS) and to determine the effects of diets containing DDGS on gut bacteria and bacterial and digestive enzyme activities. Experimental diets contained one of the DDGS samples as the sole source of protein, and a low protein diet (5% casein) was included to estimate basal endogenous ileal CP and AA losses. Chromic oxide (0.3%) was added as an indigestible marker to all diets. Twelve cannulated barrows with an initial BW of 20.2 +/- 1.3 kg were allotted to the 4 experimental diets in a 2-period crossover design, which provided 6 observations per diet. Pigs were acclimatized to their diets for 5 d followed by a continuous 12-h digesta collection on d 6 and 7. Diet had no effect on the apparent ileal digestibility (AID) of CP (P = 0.58). The wDDGS diet generally had decreased (P < 0.05) AID of AA compared with the wcDDGS or cDDGS diet. Similarly, the values for standardized ileal digestibility of CP and most AA were smaller (P < 0.05) for the wDDGS diet compared with the other 2 DDGS diets. The Lys and Thr were the least digestible AA among the indispensable AA across the 3 DDGS samples. The digestibilities of nonstarch polysaccharides and NDF were not affected by diet (P = 0.80 and 0.40, respectively); however, the ileal digesta viscosity was greater (P < 0.05) for the wcDDGS diet than the wDDGS and cDDGS diets. The counts of Lactobacillus (P = 0.09) and Enterobacteriaceae (P = 0.05) were greater for the cDDGS diet compared with the other 2 diets. Accordingly, the cDDGS diet elicited a greater (P < 0.05) lactic acid concentration in digesta than the wDDGS diet. The activities of bacterial (P = 0.86 to 0.91) and digestive enzymes (P = 0.31 to 0.80) did not differ among the diets. The results indicate that the wDDGS had generally less protein and AA ileal digestibilities compared with the wcDDGS and cDDGS samples and that nonstarch polysaccharides and NDF digestibilities were similar among diets. Although diet influenced digesta bacterial counts, no effects were observed on the activities of bacterial and digestive enzymes.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".