Net energy of soybean oil and choice white grease in diets fed to growing and finishing pigs1
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objectives of this experiment were 1) to determine the NE of soybean oil (SBO) and choice white grease (CWG) fed to growing and finishing pigs, 2) to evaluate the effects of inclusion rate of SBO on the NE by growing and finishing pigs, and 3) to determine if there is a difference in the NE of SBO and CWG between growing and finishing pigs. Forty-eight growing (initial BW: 22.13 ± 1.78 kg) and 48 finishing (initial BW: 84.17 ± 5.80 kg) barrows were used, and they were housed and fed individually. Within each stage of growth, pigs were allotted to 8 outcome groups of 6 barrows based on BW. Within each outcome group, pigs were randomly allotted to 1 of 6 groups. Two groups at each stage of growth served as an initial slaughter group. Pigs in the remaining groups were assigned to 4 dietary treatments and slaughtered at the conclusion of the experiment. The basal diet contained corn, soybean meal, and no supplemental lipids. Three additional diets were formulated by mixing 95% of the basal diet and 5% SBO, 90% of the basal diet and 10% SBO, or 90% of the basal diet and 10% CWG. Average daily gain and G:F for finishing pigs and apparent total tract digestibility of energy for growing and finishing pigs increased (linear, P < 0.05) with lipid content, but was not affected by lipid source. The lipid gain:protein gain ratio and the energy retention also increased (linear, P ≤ 0.05) with lipid content in growing and finishing pigs. There were no interactive effects between lipid content and stage of growth or between lipid source and stage of growth on the NE of diets and the NE of dietary lipids. The NE of diets increased (linear, P < 0.01) with increasing SBO (2,056, 2,206, and 2,318 kcal/kg for diets containing 0, 5, or 10% SBO). The NE of the diet containing 10% CWG (2,440 kcal/kg) was greater (P < 0.05) than the NE of the diet containing 10% SBO. The NE of diets was greater (P < 0.05) for finishing pigs than for growing pigs regardless of lipid content or source. The NE of SBO included at 5% (5,073 kcal/kg) was not different from the NE of SBO included at 10% (4,679 kcal/kg), but the NE of CWG (5,900 kcal/kg) was greater (P < 0.05) than the NE of SBO. The stage of growth had no impact on the NE of SBO or CWG. In conclusion, the NE of lipids is not affected by the content of dietary lipids, but the NE of CWG is greater than the NE of SBO.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".