163 Effect of Tail-End Dehulling of Canola Meal on Apparent and Standardized Ileal Digestibility of Amino Acids When Fed to Growing Pigs.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim was to determine the effect of tail-end dehulling of canola meal (CM) on apparent (AID) and standardized (SID) ileal digestibility of amino acids (AA) when fed to growing pigs. Three ileal cannulated barrows (initial BW 58 ± 3.6 kg) were assigned to the experimental diets in a replicated 3 × 3 Latin square design to provide 6 replicates per treatment. Diets consisted of a cornstarch-based diet with either regular canola meal (RCM), dehulled canola meal (DCM), or the resulting coarse fraction (CCM) as the only source of protein. All diets contained titanium dioxide (0.3%) as an indigestible marker. In general, it was no effect (P > 0.10) of dehulling on the AID of most AA. However, AID of Phe was higher (P < 0.05) in RCM, compared to DCM and CCM. The AID of Thr was greater (P < 0.05) in RCM and DCM compared to CCM. Likewise, The AID of Ile and Leu, was higher (P < 0.05) in RCM and CCM compared to DCM. The SID of indispensable AA was not affected (P > 0.10) by dehulling. However, the SID of Phe was greater for RCM (P < 0.05) compared to DCM and CCM. Whereas, SID for Thr was higher in RCM and DCM compared to CCM. By removing high amounts of fiber, dehulling increased (P < 0.05) the standardized ileal digestible AA content of DCM compared to RCM by 9%. However, Lys increased by 12%, Thr and Phe 8%, His 11%, and Arg 15%. The standardized digestible His, and Lys contents, were similar between RCM and CCM. However, CCM had lower digestible Arg, Leu, Phe, and Thr, contents than RCM and DCM. In conclusion, the results indicate that for most AA, the AID and SID in CM were not affected by dehulling. However, the content of ileal digestible AA can be increased with tail-end dehulling of CM.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".