0489 Effect of dietary wheat bran inclusion on nutrient digestibility in weaned pigs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Wheat bran (WB) as a source of insoluble fiber has been shown to confer gut health benefits in weaned piglets. However, there is limited data on the influence of WB inclusion in weaner pig diets on digestibility. Thus, the aim of this study was to assess the effect of a 4% dietary inclusion of coarsely milled (1088 µ of particle size) WB on nutrient digestibility in weaned pigs. Six barrows (7.3 ± 0.1kg BW) fitted with a T-cannula at the distal ileum were fed one of two test diets consisting of: (1) a barley-wheat-corn-soybean meal-based diet (Control) and (2) a WB diet with 4% coarsely milled WB. Diets were assigned according to a 2x2 Latin square design repeated three times. At the end of the second period, all pigs were fed a 5% casein-corn starch-based diet to estimate basal endogenous amino acid (AA) losses. Each period lasted 9 d consisting of 5 d for adaptation followed by 2 d for fecal collection and 2 d for ileal digesta collection (12 h/d). All pigs were fed diets mixed with 0.3% titanium dioxide as an indigestible marker to calculate apparent total tract digestibility (ATTD), apparent ileal digestibility (AID) and standardized ileal digestibility (SID) of nutrients. Treatment means were compared using the Student t test procedure of SAS (SAS Inst. Inc., Cary, NC). Piglets fed the WB diet had lower ATTD of organic matter and AID of dry matter (DM) compared with those fed the control diet (89.4 vs. 88.3% and 60.8 vs. 66.4%; P < 0.05). However, piglets fed the WB diet had higher ATTD of fat compared with those fed the control diet (70.4 vs. 62.6%; P < 0.05). There were no differences in the AID and SID of nitrogen (N) and AA between the two diets (P > 0.10). Average AID values (%) were 66.3, 80.5, 41.5, 79.9, 80.4, 80.9, 87.2, 81.3, 71.6, and 76.0 for N, Arg, His, Ile, Leu, Met, Phe, Thr, and valine, respectively. Respective average SID values (%) were 79.7, 88.9, 66.4, 86.3, 84.5, 85.2, 90.3, 84.8, 80.2, and 82.7. In conclusion, results indicated that dietary inclusion of WB increased ATTD of fat and reduced ATTD of OM and AID of DM in weaned piglets. Further research is warranted to evaluate effects of WB, especially on growth and health performance, gut microbiota and fecal and/or ileal digesta volatile fatty acids production.
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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".