MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2600107854 · doi:10.2527/asasmw.2017.12.190

190 Comparative starch, fiber, and energy digestibility and characterization of undigested starch using confocal laser scanning of pulse and cereal grains in growing-finishing pigs

2017· article· en· W2600107854 on OpenAlexaff
Felina Tan, L. F. Wang, Jun Gao, E. Beltranena, Thava Vasanthan, R. T. Zijlstra

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Animal Science · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Nutrition and Physiology
Canadian institutionsAlberta Ministry of Agriculture and ForestryUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConfocal laser scanning microscopyStarchFiberFood scienceMaterials scienceChemistryBiologyComposite materialBiophysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Starch content is included in the equation to predict NE value of feedstuffs (NRC, 2012), but NE value may vary depending on apparent ileal digestibility (AID) vs. apparent total tract digestibility (ATTD) of starch. The botanical origin of starch determines starch structure and, thus, may affect the AID of starch. The objective was to determine digestibility of starch, fiber, and energy, and to characterize undigested starch of grains in growing pigs. Seven ileal-cannulated barrows (initial BW 30 kg) were fed 6 diets containing 96% of 1 of 6 feedstuffs (pulse: faba bean, field pea, chick pea; cereal: barley, wheat, corn) or a N-free diet in a 7 × 7 Latin square at 2.8 × maintenance DE to collect feces and digesta. Apparent hindgut fermentation (AHF) was calculated as ATTD−AID. Starch structure of feedstuffs and digesta was analyzed using confocal laser scanning microscopy (CLSM) and scanning electron microscopy (SCEM). The model included diet as fixed effect, and pig and period as random effects. Cereals contained more starch than pulses (57–68% vs. 41–45%), but pulses contained more total dietary fiber (TDF) than cereals (23–27% vs. 14–21%). The AID of starch was lowest (P < 0.05) in faba bean (85.3%) followed by field pea and chick pea (87–90%), and cereals (93–96%). The ATTD of starch was almost complete ( > 99%) among grains; therefore, AHF of starch was greatest (P < 0.05) for faba bean and field pea (12–15%). The AID and ATTD of TDF was greatest (P < 0.05) in field pea and chick pea and lowest in corn. The AHF of TDF was greatest (P < 0.05) for corn (42.0%) and lowest for wheat (23.8%). The AID of energy was greatest (P < 0.05) in field pea and wheat; and AHF of energy was greater (P < 0.05) in pulses than cereals (17–20% vs. 8–11%). The CLSM revealed that larger pulse starch granules were embedded in protein matrixes; hence, more starch granules remained intact in digesta. In SCEM images, the greater surface area of small corn starch granules may contribute to its 97% AID. Smooth and cracked surfaces of starch granules in digesta among sources indicated different stages of digestion. In conclusion, AID of starch is greater in cereals than pulses; however, ATTD of starch was complete among grains. Hindgut fermentation of starch and TDF of pulses will contribute to their energy value. Defining the digestible fraction of starch and fermentable fractions of starch and fiber may enhance accuracy of equations to predict NE value of feedstuffs.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations2
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Animal ScienceSame topicAnimal Nutrition and PhysiologyFrench-language works237,207