The effects of dietary energy concentration and weaning site on weanling pig performance1
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study was conducted to evaluate the effects of dietary energy density and weaning environment on pig performance. Treatment diets were formulated to vary in DE concentration by changing the relative proportions of low (barley) and high (wheat, oat groats, and canola oil) energy ingredients. In Exp. 1, 84 pigs in each of 3 replications, providing a total of 252 pigs, were weaned at 17 x 2 d of age and randomly assigned to either an on-site or an off-site nursery and to 1 of 3 dietary DE concentrations (3.35, 3.50, or 3.65 Mcal/kg). Each site consisted of a nursery containing 6 pens; 3 pens housed 7 barrows and 3 housed 7 gilts. All pigs received nontreatment diets in phase I (17 to 19 d of age) and phase II (20 to 25 d of age), respectively. Dietary treatments were fed from 25 to 56 d of age. Off-site pigs were heavier at 56 d of age (23.4 vs. 21.3 kg; P < 0.05) and had greater ADFI (0.77 vs. 0.69 kg/d; P < 0.01) than on-site pigs. There was a linear decrease in ADG (P < 0.01) and ADFI (P < 0.001) with increasing DE concentration. Efficiency of gain improved (P < 0.01) with increasing DE concentration. There was no interaction between weaning site and diet DE concentration, indicating that on-site and off-site pigs responded similarly to changes in diet DE concentration. In Exp. 2, nutrient digestibility of the treatment diets used in Exp. 1 was determined using 36 pigs with either ad libitum or feed intake restricted to 5.5% of BW. Energy and N digestibility increased (P < 0.001) with increasing DE concentration. Nitrogen retention and daily DE intake increased with DE concentration in pigs fed the restricted amount of feed (P < 0.05). These results indicate that weaning off-site improves pig weight gain. The weanling pig was able to compensate for reduced dietary DE concentration through increased feed intake. Growth limitation in the weanling pig may not be overcome simply by increasing dietary DE concentration.
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".