MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2800435001 · doi:10.1093/jas/sky142

Dietary D-xylose effects on growth performance, portal nutrient fluxes, and energy expenditure in growing pigs1

2018· article· en· W2800435001 on OpenAlexaff
Atta Kofi Agyekum, M. C. Walsh, Elijah G. Kiarie, J. S. Sands, 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
KeywordsXyloseAnimal scienceNutrientXylanaseFood scienceMealFodderUreaChemistryBiologyFermentationBiochemistryAgronomyEnzyme

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Xylanase is commonly added to pig diets rich in arabinoxylans to promote nutrient utilization and growth. However, high doses of xylanase could release high amounts of xylose in the upper gut, which could have negative nutritional and metabolic implications. However, the amount of xylose to elicit such adverse effects is not clear. Thus, two experiments were conducted to investigate the effects of dietary xylose on the growth performance and portal-drained viscera (PDV) fluxes of glucose (GLU), urea-N (BUN), insulin production, and O2 consumption in growing pigs. In Exp. 1, 64 pigs (21.4 ± 0.1 kg BW), housed as either two barrows or gilts per pen (eight pens per diet) were used to determine the effects of increasing levels of D-xylose (0, 5, 15, and 25%) in a corn-soybean meal-cornstarch-based diet on pig growth performance in a 28-d trial. Cornstarch was substituted for D-xylose (wt/wt) in the control diet. BW and feed intake were monitored weekly. D-xylose linearly reduced (P < 0.05) final BW, ADG, and G:F but not ADFI. However, final BW, ADG, and G:F of pigs fed 15% D-xylose did not differ from pigs fed 0% D-xylose. Thus, the results suggested that pigs could tolerate up to 15% dietary D-xylose. In Exp. 2, six gilts (22.8 ± 1.6 kg BW), fitted with permanent catheters in the portal vein, ileal vein, and carotid artery, were fed the 0% and 15% D-xylose diets at 4% of their BW once daily at 0900 h for 7 d in a cross-over design (six pigs per diet). On d 7, pigs were placed in indirect calorimeters to measure whole-animal O2 consumption and sample blood simultaneously for 6 h from the portal vein and carotid artery after feeding to assay GLU, O2, BUN, and insulin concentrations. Net portal nutrients and insulin production were calculated as porto-arterial concentration differences × portal blood flow (PBF) rate, whereas PDV O2 consumption was calculated as arterial-portal O2 differences × PBF. Diet had no effect on postprandial PBF, insulin production, and portal BUN flux and O2 consumption. Pigs fed 0% D-xylose had greater (P < 0.05) postprandial portal and arterial BUN concentrations, and portal GLU concentration and flux than pigs fed 15% D-xylose diet. In conclusion, feeding growing pigs a diet containing 15% D-xylose did not reduce pig performance or affect PDV energetic demand but reduced GLU fluxes.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations3
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Animal ScienceSame topicAnimal Nutrition and PhysiologyFrench-language works237,207