MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2409833130 · doi:10.2527/msasas2016-230

230 Effect of divergent selection for residual feed intake on whole body protein turnover in growing gilts fed either adequate or lysine deficient diets

2016· article· en· W2409833130 on OpenAlexaff
Deltora Hewitt, C. F. M. de Lange, Treyson Antonick, Jack C. M. Dekkers, A. R. Pendleton, Anoosh Rakhshandeh

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Animal Science · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Nutrition and Physiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsResidual feed intakeProtein turnoverAnimal scienceLysineFeed conversion ratioBiologyAmino acidLimitingBiochemistryBody weightEndocrinologyProtein biosynthesis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Protein turnover, representing both protein synthesis and degradation, is one of the most energy consuming processes in growing pigs, and may be one of the main factors contributing to variation in residual feed intake (RFI). RFI is a measure of feed efficiency that reflects differences in the efficiency of the use of feed for maintenance and growth. We previously observed that genetic selection for low RFI did not improve efficiency of dietary Lys utilization above maintenance for protein retention. Little is known about the effects of genetic selection for RFI on whole-body protein turnover rate. The current study evaluated the effects of divergent selection for RFI on whole-body protein turnover of growing pigs fed either adequate or lysine deficient diets. Twenty four gilts (BW 66 ± 5 kg) were selected from generation 9 of the low RFI (LRFI; n = 12) and high RFI (HRFI; n = 12) Iowa State University Yorkshire RFI selection lines, and were housed in metabolism crates at the Texas Tech University Swine Center. Six pigs from each genetic line were assigned to 1 of 2 levels of Lys intake (70 and 100% of estimated requirements) from diets in which Lys was first limiting among amino acids. The “single-dose end-product” approach was used for the measurement of protein turnover. Whole-body N flux was determined using an oral dose of [15N]-glycine (7.1 ± 0.29 mg/kg BW) and measurement of I5N enrichment in urinary ammonia or urea. There was no effect of line or of the interaction between line and Lys intake on N flux, protein synthesis, protein degradation, and protein deposition (P > 0.05). Lys intake increased N flux (from 119 to 149 SE 15.3 g/d), protein synthesis (from 98 to 117 g of N/d), protein degradation (from 84 to 100 g of N/d), and protein deposition (from 13 to 16 g/d; P < 0.05). The protein synthesis-to-retention ratio tended to be higher in the LRFI compared to the HRFI line (6.5 vs. 5.8 SE 0.62; P = 0.06). Collectively, these results suggest that divergent selection for residual feed intake is not associated with changes in whole-body protein turnover in growing pigs. Therefore, protein turnover does not appear to be one of the physiological mechanisms contributing to differences in RFI in these lines of growing pigs. USDA-NIFA grant number 2011–68004–30336.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations2
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Animal ScienceSame topicAnimal Nutrition and PhysiologyFrench-language works237,207