The impact of ground water high in sulfates on the growth performance, nutrient utilization, and tissue mineral levels of pigs housed under commercial conditions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: To examine the effect of drinking water high in sulfates on the growth performance, nutrient utilization, and tissue mineral levels of newly weaned pigs housed in a commercial operation. Materials and methods: Performance and nutrient digestibility were determined for pigs consuming either water treated by reverse osmosis (RO; 219 mg total dissolved solutes (TDS) per L, 29 mg sulfates per L) or untreated ground water (3078 mg TDS per L, 1650 mg sulfates per L). In each of two experiments, approximately 240 pigs (20 +/- 3 days of age, 5.9 +/- 1.0 kg) received either RO-treated or untreated water for 35 days. In Experiment One, water was delivered either via nipple drinkers or dish-type drinkers. In Experiment Two, diets either contained supplemental zinc oxide (3000 mg zinc per kg) or no supplemental zinc. Results: Average daily gain, average daily feed intake, gain-to-feed ratio, water disappearance, and nutrient digestibility were similar regardless of water source (P > .05). Water disappearance was lower (P < .01) and feed efficiency tended to be higher (P < .10) when pigs used dish-type drinkers. Average daily gain and feed intake were lowest when pigs consumed a diet with added zinc (P < .05) and, for the first 3 weeks after weaning, when they also received untreated water (diet-by-water interaction; P < .05). Implications: Weanling pigs can tolerate drinking water containing high concentrations of sulfates. Poor performance or diarrhea in nursery pigs should not be attributed to water quality until other possible contributing factors are investigated.
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".