Physiological Parameters of Pigs Raised with and without Environmental Enrichment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ethical and commercial issues are associated with animal welfare in pig farming, in that sense, the objective of this work was to evaluate physiological and blood parameters in addition to weight gain in pigs raised with and without sunlight and environmental enrichment (EE), as well as to correlate physiological and environmental parameters as welfare indicators. Twenty-four pigs distributed in a randomized block design with a 2 × 2 factorial arrangement were used. Blocks were represented by shifts (morning and afternoon), and factors by the presence or absence of EE and sunlight. Blood and environmental parameters of thermal comfort, in addition to weight gain, were registered. Physiological parameters showed to be shift dependent (p < 0.05), with the afternoon shift being superior when compared to the morning shift, thus indicating climate influence. Weight gain showed significant interactions (p < 0.05) in the presence and absence of sunlight and EE in the stalls. Temperature correlated positively with the physiological parameters. Moisture showed negative correlations with physiological parameters. The packed cell volume was lower (p < 0.05) in the presence of EE. The EE provides physiological well-being and weight gain for pigs in the nursery stage, especially when sunlight was absent in the stalls.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 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".