Comparison of apparent ileal and total tract digestibility of calcium in calcium sources for pigs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Two experiments were conducted to compare apparent ileal digestibility (AID) and apparent total tract digestibility (ATTD) of calcium (Ca) in pigs. In experiment 1, three semipurified diets with soybean meal, canola meal, or sunflower meal as the sole source of Ca were formulated. Eighteen cannulated pigs (initial BW = 66 ± 5 kg) were assigned in a randomized complete block design to three treatments and six replicates per treatment. Results indicated that for either Ca or phosphorus (P), the ATTD was not different from the AID in the three diets (Psite = 0.16 and 0.81, respectively). In experiment 2, diets with four Ca concentrations were formulated with calcium carbonate as the Ca source. Sixteen cannulated pigs (initial BW = 73 ± 4 kg) were assigned in a randomized complete block design to four treatments in two experimental periods. The results indicated that the ATTD of Ca was not different from the AID for all diets. Furthermore, the Ca digestibility was not affected by dietary treatments, but the P digestibility was linearly improved (P < 0.01) as dietary Ca and P concentrations increased. Thus, it is concluded that both AID and ATTD can be used to describe the digestibility of Ca for growing–finishing pigs.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".