Effect of chicken egg anti-F4 antibodies on performance and diarrhea incidences in enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli K88 + -challenged piglets
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim was to evaluate the effects of dietary supplementation of spay-dried whole egg containing anti-F4 antibodies (SDWE) against recombinantly produced F4 antigens in enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli K88+ (ETEC)-challenged piglets. Twenty-seven 21-d-old and individually housed piglets were randomly allotted to 3 treatments consisting of a wheat-soybean meal basal diet containing either 0 (control egg powder; CEP), 0.1% (SDWE1) or 0.4% (SDWE2) SDWE. After a 7-d adaptation period, blood samples were collected from all pigs, and pigs were weighed and orally challenged with an ETEC inoculum. Blood was sampled at 24 and 48 h post-challenge, and diarrhea incidences and scores were recorded. On d 14, all pigs were weighed and then euthanized to obtain intestinal tissue samples for histomorphology measurement. During the pre-challenge period, pigs fed the SDWE showed a linear improvement (P < 0.05) in average daily gain (ADG) and gain to feed ratio (G:F), but there were no differences among treatments in growth performance during the post-challenge period. Diarrhea incidences and scores, fecal shedding of ETEC, plasma urea nitrogen content and intestinal histomorphology were similar among treatments. The results show that 0.4% SDWE supported greater piglet performance before challenge although such benefits were not evident during the post-challenge period at either 0.1% or 0.4% supplementation.
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".