Influence of Methionine on Growth and Nitrogen Balance in Weanling Quarter Horses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Twenty-four Quarter horse weanlings (120 d +/- 10 d) were blocked by age into 4 \ngroups (n = 6) for a 56 d trial to evaluate the influence of methionine on growth and \nnitrogen retention. Weanlings were housed by block and individually fed 1 of 4 \nconcentrate diets twice daily at 1.5% BW (as fed). Weanlings were randomly assigned to \n1 of 4 treatments: basal (0.20 MET), basal + 0.03% methionine (0.23 MET), basal + \n0.07% methionine (0.27 MET), and basal + 0.11% methionine (0.31 MET). Diets were \nformulated to be isonitrogenous, isocaloric, and contain equal amounts of LYS and \nTHR. Coastal bermudagrass hay was individually fed at 0.75% BW (as fed). Growth \nmeasurements, body weight, rump fat, and plasma were obtained every 7 d. The final 4 \ndays consisted of total collection of urine and feces. Feed, fecal, and urine samples were \nanalyzed for nitrogen content and nitrogen balance was calculated. Urine was analyzed \nfor urea and ammonia concentration. Plasma was analyzed for urea concentration. Grain, \nhay, and fecal samples were analyzed for nutrient composition. \nData were analyzed using the PROC MIX procedure of SAS. Linear, quadratic, \nand cubic effects were tested in the form of contrasts. There was no influence of treatment on growth measurements, nitrogen balance, or urinary urea or ammonia. \nIntake of LYS and THR (g/d) did not differ among treatments (P = 0.78 and P = 0.38 \nrespectively). Plasma urea nitrogen (PUN) was influenced by treatment (P = 0.005) \nexhibiting quadratic (P = 0.04) and cubic (P = 0.002) effects. An unexpected peak in \nPUN was observed with 0.27 MET. Upon analysis, 0.20 MET contained more lysine \nthan formulated, and 0.27 MET contained the least lysine. Treatments 0.20 MET and \n0.31 MET contained more threonine compared to formulations. These differences may \nexplain unexpected values of PUN concentration. Results suggest future studies that \nmore closely isolate methionine as the only dietary variable are necessary to better \nexplain the methionine requirements of weanling horses.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".