MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2277881529 · doi:10.54846/jshap/775

An investigation of the impacts of induced parturition, birth weight, birth order, litter size, and sow parity on piglet serum concentrations of immunoglobulin G

2013· article· en· W2277881529 on OpenAlexaff
K. Nguyen, Glen Cassar, R. M. Friendship, Abdolvahab Farzan, R. N. Kirkwood, Douglas C. Hodgins

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Swine Health and Production · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicAnimal Behavior and Welfare Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLitterParity (physics)Animal scienceBiologyBirth weightAntibodyPregnancyImmunologyEcologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: To determine the impacts of induced parturition, birth weight, birth order, litter size, and sow parity on piglet serum concentrations of immunoglobulin G (IgG) . Materials and methods: In Experiment 1, sows were either induced to farrow (n = 56) or allowed to farrow naturally (n = 84). Litters of induced sows were placed immediately into a warm crèche until farrowing was complete, then all piglets were weighed and placed with the sow at the same time. Blood samples were collected at 3 days of age from one or two of the smallest pigs, one medium pig, and the largest pig in each litter for measurement of serum IgG. In Experiment 2, the firstborn and last-born piglets in 78 litters were blood sampled at 3 days of age and sera were assayed for total IgG. Results: Experiment 1. Mean serum IgG concentration was higher in piglets from induced litters than in piglets from control sows (P < .001). Serum IgG concentrations increased with increased piglet weight (P < .001). Piglets from larger litters had lower serum IgG (P < .001). Serum IgG concentrations in piglets were not affected by sow parity (Experiment 1) or birth order (Experiment 2). Implications: Supervision of farrowing may allow for improved colostrum intake with benefits to passive immunity. However, first-born pigs do not appear to get a disproportionate share of available immunoglobulins.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.263
Threshold uncertainty score0.284

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.278 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations22
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Swine Health and ProductionSame topicAnimal Behavior and Welfare StudiesFrench-language works237,207