Effect of nutrient intake in lactation on sow performance: determining the threonine requirement of the high-producing lactating sow.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Reproductive performance is steadily increasing within the pork industry; logically, amino acid requirements need to be redefined for sows producing larger litters. The objective of this study was to determine the threonine requirement of the high-producing lactating sow and to determine the effect of lysine on this requirement. A total of 419 PIC C-15 sows were assigned randomly to treatment within parity groups (1, 2, and 3+) and gestation treatment at d 110 of gestation. Lactation diets were formulated to contain 0.80% total lysine (tLYS) with 0.30, 0.35, 0.40, 0.45, 0.50, 0.55, 0.60, or 0.65% total threonine (tTHR) or 1.06% tLYS with 0.40, 0.45, 0.50, 0.55, 0.60, 0.65, or 0.70% tTHR. Litters were standardized to a minimum of 11 piglets within 48 h after farrowing, and sows had free access to feed throughout lactation (lactation length = 20.1 +/- 0.1 d). Sow ADFI exceeded expectation, averaging 6.90, 7.40, and 7.20 kg/d for Parities 1, 2, and 3+, respectively. Daily tLYS intake was 58 g/d (47 g of apparent ileal digestible lysine [dLYS] per day) and 74 g/d (59 g dLYS/d) for the low- and high-lysine group, respectively. Lysine intake did not affect sow or litter performance (P > 0.10). Sows gained an average of 4.8 kg in lactation. Using regression analysis, BW gain was maximized at 0.54% tTHR for all parity groups (quadratic; P < 0.05). Litter weaning weight (67.1, 67.9, and 66.2 kg for Parities 1, 2, and 3+, respectively) and litter weight gain (2.49, 2.53, and 2.44 kg/d for Parities 1, 2, and 3+, respectively) were maximized at 0.53% tTHR using regression analysis, for all parity groups (quadratic; P < 0.05). Based on regression analysis, plasma urea nitrogen on d 10 and 18 was minimized at 0.54% tTHR (P < 0.05). Lysine levels in excess of 58 g of tLYS/d did not benefit sow or litter performance. The requirement for threonine to minimize sow tissue mobilization was 37, 40, and 38 g tTHR/d (28, 30, and 30 g of apparent ileal digestible threonine [dTHR] per day) for Parities 1, 2, and 3+ sows, respectively. The threonine required to maximize litter performance was 36, 39, and 38 g of tTHR/d (28, 30, and 29 g of dTHR/d) for Parities 1, 2, and 3+ sows, respectively. Alternatively, the requirement can be expressed as 14.3 g tTHR (11.8 g dTHR) per kilogram of litter gain.
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 | 0.003 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".