MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2904862773 · doi:10.1093/jas/sky404.408

PSI-31 Effects of red-osier dogwood (Cornus stolonifera) extract supplementation on nutrient digestibility and growth performance of weaned piglets.

2018· article· en· W2904862773 on OpenAlexaff
J. Lee, J Kim, Chengbo Yang, K O, C. M. Nyachoti

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Animal Science · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBiochemical and biochemical processes
Canadian institutionsSt. Boniface HospitalUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFecesAnimal scienceBiologyDry matterNutrientFeed conversion ratioGallic acidRandomized block designFood scienceBody weightBiochemistryAntioxidantHorticulture

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Red-osier dogwood (Cornus stolonifera; ROD) is rich in phenolic compounds such as ellagic acid, gallic acid, and tyrosol, and these compounds have antioxidative ability. The objective of this experiment was to investigate the effects of dietary supplementation of ROD extract on nutrient digestibility and growth performance of weaned piglets. A total of 56 weaned pigs were assigned to four dietary treatments in a randomized complete block design with 7 replicates per treatment. Each pen had 2 pigs, one male and female. The four dietary treatments included 1) negative control (NC; basal diet), 2) positive control (PC; NC + 0.25% antibiotics), 3) ROD1 (NC + 0.2% ROD extract), and 4) ROD2 (NC + 0.4% ROD extract), and were fed to pigs for a 14-d period. Body weight (BW), and feed disappearance were recorded weekly to determine average daily gain (ADG), average daily feed intake, and gain:feed ratio. Fecal scores were determined twice daily (0900 and 1700) using a numerical score (0 = normal feces, 1 = soft feces, and 2 = diarrhea) for first 9 d. Fecal samples were collected on d 12 to 13 to estimate dry matter (DM) and energy digestibility. On d 14, pigs fed the ROD1 diet had lower (P < 0.05) BW compared to those fed the PC control. Pigs fed diets containing ROD had lower (P < 0.05) ADG than those fed the PC diet. However, there was no difference in overall ADG of pigs between the NC and ROD treatments. The supplementation of ROD had no effect on fecal scores and apparent total tract digestibility of DM and energy for pigs. In conclusion, although the ROD diet showed lower BW on d 14 and lower ADG on overall period, there were no significant differences in apparent total tract DM and energy digestibility among treatments.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.060
Threshold uncertainty score0.297

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.262
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 teacher head, 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

Citations2
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Animal ScienceSame topicBiochemical and biochemical processesFrench-language works237,207