MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2500501054 · doi:10.54846/jshap/670

Isospora suis infection and its association with postweaning performance on three southwestern Ontario swine farms

2011· article· en· W2500501054 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Andrea Aliaga-Leyton, Robert Friendship, Cate Dewey, Cory Todd, Andrew S. Peregrine

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Swine Health and Production · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicCoccidia and coccidiosis research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersAgricultural Adaptation Council
KeywordsIsosporaVirologyBiologyVeterinary medicineMicrobiologyFecesMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: To determine the association between Isospora suis infection and weight gain in pigs up to 8 weeks of age. Materials and methods: A prospective cohort study was conducted on a convenience sample of three swine farms in Ontario. Fecal samples were collected from randomly selected piglets from each of 72 litters and examined for oocysts using centrifugal floatation. Piglet weight was recorded six times, during the first, second, third, fourth, fifth, and eighth weeks of life. If one or more suckling piglets from a litter were shedding I suis oocysts, then the litter was classified as infected. A linear mixed model was used to examine the effect of infection on weight gain. Results: Isospora suis infection during suckling was associated with lower weights of pigs at the end of the nursery stage (average 62 days of age). Pigs from infected litters were 1.4 kg lighter than pigs from non-infected litters (95% CI, 1.1-1.8 kg; P < .001). Implications: Infection with I suis during the suckling period can have an impact on postweaning performance. Thus, calculations of the economic impact of coccidiosis need to include the effect of slower growth rates in the first few weeks after weaning, as well as a reduction in suckling pig performance.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.087
Threshold uncertainty score0.600

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.187 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations7
Published2011
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Swine Health and ProductionSame topicCoccidia and coccidiosis researchFrench-language works237,207