Comparative assessment of canine-origin <i>Lactobacillus johnsonii</i> CPN23 and dairy-origin <i>Lactobacillus acidophillus</i> NCDC 15 for nutrient digestibility, faecal fermentative metabolites and selected gut health indices in dogs
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The present experiment was undertaken to validate a probiotic of canine origin for its potential use in dogs. A total of fifteen adult female Labrador dogs were allocated to three equal groups and fed a basal diet without probiotic (control) or with probiotic of either canine ( Lactobacillus johnsonii CPN23; cPRO) or dairy ( L. acidophilus NCDC 15; dPRO) origin for 9 weeks. The digestibility of most macronutrients remained similar among the groups; however, fibre digestibility was improved ( P = 0·034) in dogs receiving cPRO. The faecal fermentative metabolites ammonia ( P < 0·05) and lactate ( P = 0·094) were altered favourably, indicating a positive influence of both probiotics. Faecal concentrations of acetate, propionate and butyrate were increased ( P < 0·01) in both probiotic groups. However, improvements were higher in cPRO v . dPRO. The delayed-type hypersensitivity reaction to intradermal inoculation of phytohaemagglutinin-P was higher ( P = 0·053) in cPRO as compared with control. The antibody response to sheep erythrocytes was, however, similar across the three groups. Overall, in dogs, the canine-origin probiotic was superior when compared with the dairy-origin probiotic.
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.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 it