Belly-nosing in early-weaned piglets is not influenced by diet quality or the presence of milk in the diet.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Early weaning of piglets can lead to an increase in belly-nosing and other oral-nasal behavior (nosing, chewing, or sucking other piglets), but the causative factors involved in these behavior patterns are largely unknown. Because these behavior patterns resemble massaging the udder and sucking, they may be associated with feeding. The objectives of this study were to determine any effect of diet quality or the presence of milk in the diet on belly-nosing behavior of piglets weaned at 14 to 18 d. During the first 2 wk after weaning, piglets were fed diets differing in quality and inclusion of milk products. Six replicates of eight piglets per replicate, blocked by initial body weight, (n = 192) were offered one of four dietary treatments: HQM: high quality, high in milk products; HQ: high quality, no milk products; PQ: poor quality, no milk products; HQ+MR: high quality, no milk products (as HQ) sprayed with milk replacer five times daily. Thereafter, the piglets were fed a standard nursery diet. Feed intake was measured daily for wk 1 and again at the end of wk 2. Behavior was recorded every 5 min during two 4-h periods on d 2 to 7, 10, 14, 17 and 21 after weaning. Dietary treatment influenced ADFI and ADG during wk 1. Average daily feed intake (P < 0.05) and ADG (P < 0.05) of piglets on PQ were less than those of piglets on the other treatments. During wk 2, ADFI (P > 0.10) and ADG (P > 0.10) were the same across all treatments. Overall, ADFI was not influenced by the inclusion of milk products in the diet or the addition of milk replacer (P > 0.10); however, ADG was. Piglets on HQM had higher ADG than those on HQ during wk 2 (P < 0.05) and 3 after weaning (P < 0.05). However, milk replacer did not influence ADG (P > 0.10). Although the dietary treatments did affect ADFI and ADG, there were no effects on any behavior pattern recorded, including time spent at the feeder (P > 0.10). Lower weight-for-age piglets performed more oral-nasal behavior, in total, than higher weight-for-age piglets (P < 0.03). Neither feeding a poor-quality diet nor the presence of milk in the diet had an effect on belly-nosing or other oral-nasal behavior patterns during the first 3 wk after weaning. Belly-nosing does not seem to be associated with feeding.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".