Effect of a protected blend of organic acids and medium-chain fatty acids on growth performance, nutrient digestibility, blood profiles, meat quality, faecal microflora, and faecal gas emission in finishing pigs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A total of 105 finishing pigs [(Yorkshire × Landrace) × Duroc] with an initial body weight of 51.0 ± 3.33 kg were used in a 10 wk trial to evaluate the effect of a protected blend of organic acids (OAs) and medium-chain fatty acids (MCFAs) in finishing pigs. Pigs were randomly allotted to one of three dietary treatments such as CON (basal diet); MC1 (basal diet + 0.1% protected organic acids); and MC2 (basal diet + 0.2% protected organic acids). Pigs fed the MC1 and MC2 diets increased (P < 0.05) average daily gain and gain to feed ratio compared with the CON diet from weeks 0 to 5 and during the whole experiment. Pigs fed the MC1 and MC2 diets increased (P < 0.05) concentration of immunoglobulin G (IgG) compared with the CON diet at the 5th week. Administration of the MC1 and MC2 diets increased Lactobacillus counts and decreased Escherichia coli counts compared with the CON diet (P < 0.05). However, no significant differences were found on nutrient digestibility, meat quality, and faecal noxious gas emission among treatments. In conclusion, the blend of OAs and MCFAs supplementation increased growth performance, the concentration of IgG, and the Lactobacillus counts, as well as decreased the E. coli counts.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".