210 Evaluation of Benzoic Acid As an Alternative to Antibiotic Growth Promoter in Weaned Pigs.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Benzoic acid supplement (BA) was evaluated as an alternative to anti-microbial growth promoter in weaned pigs. A total of 96 piglets (6.2±.3 kg BW) were weaned at d 21 of age and placed in pens (4 piglets per pen) based on BW and gender and allocated to three diets to give 8 replicates. Diets included: control (C) corn-soybean meal diet, C + in-feed antibiotic (AB, 220mg/kg chlortetracycline hydrochloride and 31.2 mg/kg tiamulin) and C + 0.5% BA (BA). Pigs had free access to diets and water for six weeks. Feed intake and BW were taken weekly to calculate ADG, ADFI and FCR. Fecal scores were taken from d 8-14 post-weaning to assess incidence and severity of diarrhea and grab fecal samples taken for fecal DM content. The severity of diarrhea was assessed using a fecal consistency scoring (1, normal; 2, soft feces; 3, mild diarrhea; 4, severe diarrhea). In wk 2, pigs fed BA showed greater (P = 0.04) ADG than C fed pigs which in turn had similar ADG to AB fed pigs. However, in wk 4 and 5, pigs fed AB showed greater (P < 0.05) ADG than C whereas BA fed pigs had intermediate and similar (P > 0.10) ADG to C or AB fed pigs. The overall (wk 1-6) ADG and final BW were greater (P < 0.05) for AB and tended to be higher (P = 0.07) for BA fed pigs than for C fed pigs. However, ADG and final BW for pigs fed AB and BA was similar (P > 0.10). The overall ADG was 494, 533, 528 g/d for C, AB and BA, respectively and corresponding final BW was 26.9, 28.6 and 28.2 kg, respectively. There was no effect (P > 0.05) of diets on feed intake. In the overall, pigs fed AB (1.58) and BA (1.54) had better (P < 0.05) FCR compared to C (1.64) fed pigs. Treatment effects (P < 0.05) on fecal score was only observed on d 12 in which case pigs fed AB and BA showed lower score than C fed pigs. In the overall, the mean fecal score was 2.5, 2.2 and 2.3 for C, AB and BA, respectively. There was no diet effect (P > 0.05) on fecal DM content; the overall mean values were 22.3, 23.9 and 23.6%, respectively. In conclusion, benzoic acid supported piglet growth to the same extent as AB growth promoter.
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) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 | 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".