Effects of pig genotype, immunological castration, and use of ractopamine on growth performance, carcass traits, and pork quality for entire male pigs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Entire male (EM) pigs (152; ∼30 kg body weight) were used to examine immunocastration using Improvest and feeding ractopamine on growth performance, carcass and meat quality, and fatty acid composition. Timing for administering second dose of Improvest compared dosing at 4 and 8 wk pre-slaughter. A factorial arrangement evaluated two genotypes [Large Whites and Duroc crossbreds (Durocs)] by five management regimens (EM fed control diet, EM fed ractopamine, second dose Improvest 4 wk pre-slaughter, second dose Improvest 8 wk pre-slaughter, second dose Improvest 4 wk pre-slaughter plus ractopamine). Average daily gain and gain to feed (G:F) were generally greater (P ≤ 0.01) in Durocs. Immunocastration increased (P < 0.01) dry matter intake (DMI); feeding ractopamine decreased (P < 0.02) DMI and increased (P < 0.03) G:F. Immunocastration decreased (P < 0.04) carcass and lean yields; feeding ractopamine increased (P < 0.04) carcass weights, lean yield, muscling, and longissimus shear force while decreasing (P < 0.01) backfats. Immunocastration did not affect loin pH, color, drip loss, and shear force. Timing for second Improvest dose did not affect most growth performance, carcass, and meat quality traits except for greater (P < 0.02) backfats when administering dose 8 wk pre-slaughter. Effects of immunocastration and (or) feeding ractopamine were relatively consistent in both genotypes evaluated.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".