Effects of feeding a blend of grains naturally contaminated with Fusarium mycotoxins on growth and immunological measurements of starter pigs, and the efficacy of a polymeric glucomannan mycotoxin adsorbent1
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An experiment was conducted to investigate the effects of feeding a blend of grains naturally contaminated with Fusarium mycotoxins on growth and immunological parameters of starter pigs. A polymeric glucomannan mycotoxin adsorbent (GM polymer, Alltech Inc., Nicholasville, KY) was also tested for its efficacy in preventing Fusarium mycotoxicoses. A total of 150 starter pigs (initial weight of 9.3 +/- 1.1 kg) were fed one of five treatment diets (six pens of five pigs per diet) for 21 d. Diets included control, low level of contaminated grains, high level of contaminated grains, high level of contaminated grains + 0.20% GM polymer, and pair-fed control for comparison with pigs receiving the high level of contaminated grains. Feed intake and cumulative weight gain of pigs decreased linearly with the inclusion of contaminated grains in the diet throughout the experiment (P < 0.0001). Weight gains recovered, however, during wk 3 (P > 0.05). There was no difference between the pair-fed group and the pigs fed the diet containing the high level of contaminated grains in terms of weight gain or feed efficiency (P > 0.05). Feeding contaminated grains linearly increased the serum albumin:globulin ratio (P = 0.01), whereas serum urea concentrations and gamma-glutamyltransferase activities responded in a quadratic fashion (P = 0.02). When compared with the pair-fed pigs, serum concentrations of total protein (P = 0.01) and globulin (P = 0.02) were decreased in pigs fed the diet containing the high level of contaminated grains. The feeding of contaminated diets did not significantly alter organ weights expressed as a percentage of BW, serum immunoglobulin concentrations, percentages of peripheral blood lymphocyte subsets, contact hypersensitivity to dinitrochlorobenzene, or primary antibody response to sheep red blood cells (P > 0.05). It was concluded that most of the adverse effects of feeding Fusarium mycotoxin-contaminated grains to starter pigs were caused by reduced feed intake. Although supplementation of GM polymer to the contaminated diet prevented some toxin-induced changes in metabolism, it did not prevent the mycotoxin-induced growth depression under the current experimental conditions.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".