MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2797489623 · doi:10.1093/jas/sky073.177

180 Effect of High Dietary Canola Meal Inclusion in Gestation and Lactation Sow Diets with or without Enzyme Supplementation on Reproductive Performance, Milk Composition and Nutrient Digestibility.

2018· article· en· W2797489623 on OpenAlexaff
Deepak E Velayudhan, M.M. Hossain, C. M. Nyachoti

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Animal Science · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Nutrition and Physiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCanolaLactationComposition (language)MealBiologyNutrientFood scienceAnimal scienceGestationAgronomyPregnancy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim was to determine the effects of high canola meal (CM) inclusion in gestation and lactation diets on reproductive performance, milk composition and nutrient digestibility of sows. Forty-five sows with an average parity of 3.1 (SD = 0.75) were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 dietary treatments (n = 15) consisting of a corn-soybean meal control diet, control diet containing 30% CM with or without a multi-enzyme complex (MC). Both gestation and lactation diets were formulated to be similar in standardized ileal digestible amino acid content and NE value and to meet or exceed NRC (2012) nutrient recommendations for sows. Sows were individually housed and were offered the experimental diets from d 60 of gestation until weaning on d 21. Sows were weighed and backfat thickness measured on d 60 and 111 of gestation, and on d 0 and 21 post-farrowing. Litters were weighed on d 0 and 21. Weaning to estrus interval in sows was recorded. Blood and milk samples were collected 2 h post-feeding from sows on d 0 and 21 to determine the plasma urea nitrogen (PUN) content and milk composition. On d 10, 11 and 12 post-farrowing, fecal samples were collected from sows to determine energy and nutrient digestibility. There were no dietary effects on lactation feed intake, sow backfat change, weaning to estrus interval and milk composition (P > 0.10). However, during lactation sows fed CM-containing diets with MC had lower (3.3 vs. 6.0 kg; P < 0.05) BW loss than those fed the control diet. There were no dietary effects on the number of piglets farrowed, born alive, weaned and piglet ADG (P > 0.10). Sows fed diets containing CM with or without MC had lower (4.4, 4.9 vs. 6.4 mmol/L; P < 0.05) PUN values compared with those fed the control diet on d 21 post-farrowing. Apparent total tract digestibility (ATTD) of energy and nutrients showed no dietary effects except for ATTD of P, wherein sows fed CM-containing diets with MC showed higher (41.7 vs. 32.6%; P < 0.05) P digestibility compared to those fed CM-containing diets without MC. In conclusion, the inclusion of up to 30% CM in gestation and lactation diet can support satisfactory sow and piglet performance without affecting energy and nutrient digestibility. Moreover, enzyme supplementation had no effect on sow or piglet performance except for sow BW loss and P digestibility.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.254 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Animal Science→Same topicAnimal Nutrition and Physiology→French-language works237,207→