MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2801836621 · doi:10.1093/jas/sky073.115

117 A Low Litter Birth Weight Phenotype Reduces the Retention Rate of Potential Replacement Gilts.

2018· article· en· W2801836621 on OpenAlexaff
J.L. Patterson, G. R. Foxcroft, Nick Holden, Matt Allerson, Andrea Hanson, E. Triemert, Laura Bruner, Juan Carlos Pinilla

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Animal Science · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicAnimal Behavior and Welfare Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLitterHerdAnimal scienceBiologyParity (physics)PopulationBirth weightAndrologyPregnancyMedicineGeneticsEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Decades of selection for increased litter size has resulted in a population of sows with an extreme low (L) average litter birth weight phenotype (BWP), irrespective of litter size. We hypothesize that this phenotype is the result of poor placental development driven by extreme intra-uterine crowding of embryos in early gestation and involves an interaction of hard to measure reproductive traits that are not responsive to current selection practices. However, measuring and managing this sow-dependent phenotype at production nucleus level would improve overall breeding herd efficiency and the number of quality weaned pigs per sow lifetime. In a NPB-funded project designed to test this concept, individual piglet weights (n = 47,338) were recorded in litters born to parity 1 - 7 multiplication sows producing Camborough replacement gilts (n = 1097; PIC). BWP was determined over at least two successive parities for litters with >9 total born. Sows (n = 651: overall mean BWP = 1.36 kg) were then classified as having a low (L, < 1.15 kg, n=63), low-medium (LM, ≥1.16 to ≤ 1.36 kg, n=281), medium-high (MH, > 1.36 and ≤ 1.6 kg, n=254) or high (H, > 1.6 kg, n=53) BWP based on their successive litter records. Within 12 h after birth, live gilts born to these sows (n = 7552) received a unique ear ID tag and retention rate (RR) was determined from birth until pre-selection to enter the breeding herd (pre-pubertal gilts at 190 d of age) having applied the standardized selection criteria. RR was analyzed as a Chi square using the PROC FREQ procedure of SAS. RR was lower (P ≤ 0.05) for L than for LM, MH and H sows within 4 d after birth (91.4, 94.1, 95.4, and 95.6 %, respectively), at 24 d of age (81.4, 84.5, 87.2, and 86.9 %, respectively), at 70 d of age (66.7, 75.4, 78.7, and 79.2 %, respectively) and at pre-selection (42.6, 52.3, 55.3, and 56.2 %, respectively). As has been reported for low individual pig birth weights, retention of gilts born to sows with the low BWP was compromised. Effects of a low BWP on final selection and on sow lifetime productivity will be determined. At the level of the production multiplication unit, the ability to predict a low BWP can be directed at strategic culling decisions and protocols for pre-weaning management of potential replacement gilts to improve retention in the gilt pool.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.284 · 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

Citations4
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Animal ScienceSame topicAnimal Behavior and Welfare StudiesFrench-language works237,207