Some aspects of the pyridoxine (vitamin B<sub>6</sub>) requirement in weanling piglets
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Four trials were carried out to determine the optimal level of dietary pyridoxine (vitamin B6) and its interaction with riboflavin (vitamin B2) in early-weaned piglets. In Trial 1, twelve piglets were tube-fed graded supplements of B6, 0, 10, 50 or 100 mg/kg. The level of 50 mg/kg maximized B6 in red blood cells (P<0.05). In Trial 2, thirty-six piglets were tube-fed with four combinations of B6 (0 v. 50 mg/kg) and B2 (0 v. 25 mg/kg). The B6 supplement increased (P<0.01) B6 in red blood cells. C-peptide and insulin responses to intravenous glucose tended (P<0.08) to or decreased (P<0.03) with B2 while no effect was observed on glucose. After gastro-enteral glucose, dietary B2 depressed C-peptide and insulin responses in B6-unsupplemented piglets and increased them in B6-supplemented piglets (P<0.03). The glucose response tended to be higher in B6-supplemented piglets (P<0.06). Trials 3 and 4 were carried out in commercial conditions using either B6 and/or B2 supplements given during 2 weeks after weaning (Trial 3) or a B6 supplement alone (50 mg/kg) given between 2 (weaning) and 10 weeks of age. Despite a marked and persistent increase (P<0.01) of B6 in red blood cells in B6-supplemented piglets, the effect on growth performance was either none (P>0.39; Trial 3) or marginally lower (<-2 %; P<0.03; Trial 4). In conclusion, it appears that a dietary supplement of 50 mg/kg B6 saturated the red blood cell pool in B6 and influenced, along with B2, the glucose homeostasis through the entero-insular axis. Nevertheless, such metabolic effects are not reflected on growth performance.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".