Short-term effect of supplemental yeast extract without or with feed enzymes on growth performance, immune status and gut structure of weaned pigs challenged with Escherichia coli lipopolysaccharide
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigated the response of piglets receiving a yeast extract without or with a multi-enzyme mixture compared with an antimicrobial growth promoter (AGP) on performance, immune status and gut structure after an E. coli lipopolysaccharide (LPS) challenge. Thirty-six pigs were allotted to six treatments including: a non-challenged control (NCC); LPS-challenged control (CC); CC + AGP; CC + yeast extract; CC + enzymes; and CC + enzymes + yeast extract. On d 7, pigs were bled and thereafter injected with LPS or sterile saline. Blood samples were collected at 6, 48, and 96 h post-challenge. After 96 h post-challenge, pigs were euthanized to obtain duodenal, jejunal and ileal samples. Overall (d 1 to 11), compared with CC pigs, AGP attenuated the LPS-induced reduction in ADG ( P = 0.004), ADFI ( P = 0.03) and gain/feed ratio ( P = 0.01). At 6 h post-challenge, AGP pigs had lower plasma urea N (PUN; P = 0.02) and serum TNF- α concentration ( P = 0.07), and higher platelet count ( P = 0.04) and serum IL-10 concentration ( P = 0.02) than CC pigs. At 48 h post-challenge, AGP pigs had lower PUN ( P = 0.02) than CC pigs, whereas enzymes + yeast extract interacted non-additively ( P = 0.001) to reduce PUN. At 96 h post-challenge, AGP pigs had lower PUN ( P = 0.02) and higher duodenal ( P = 0.03), jejunal ( P = 0.01) and ileal ( P = 0.07) villus height than CC pigs. In addition, enzymes + yeast extract interacted additively and non-additively to reduce ileal IFN-γ ( P < 0.0001) and IL-10 ( P = 0.012) expression, respectively. Generally, no differences ( P > 0.10) were observed between AGP and enzymes + yeast extract pigs on other measured parameters except for the downregulation of ileal IFN-γ ( P < 0.0001) and TNF-α ( P = 0.003) in enzymes + yeast extract pigs at 96 h post-challenge. The LPS challenged piglets receiving enzymes + yeast extract showed beneficial responses in gut structure and immunity commensurate with those receiving antibiotics, though the latter had better overall growth 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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 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".