PSXVI-6 Diet deprivation followed by compensatory feeding of gestating gilts does not affect lactation performance.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The impact of diet deprivation followed by over-allowance during gestation on metabolic status of pregnant gilts and their lactation performance was determined. Gilts were fed a standard diet until d 27 of gestation and were subsequently reared under a control (CTL; n = 28) or an experimental (TRT; n = 26) dietary regimen. The experimental regimen provided 70% (restriction diet, RES) and 115% (over-allowance diet, OVER) of the CP and NE content provided by the CTL diet. The RES diet was given to TRT gilts, from d 28 to 74 of gestation followed by the OVER diet from d 75 until farrowing. All gilts were fed 2.5 kg of feed daily. Piglets were weighed weekly until weaning (d 21) and milk samples were collected on d 19 of lactation. Blood samples were obtained on d 28, 75 and 110 of gestation, and on d 3 and 20 of lactation to measure concentrations of IGF-I, urea, FFA and glucose. The MIXED procedure of SAS with treatment as the main effect was used for statistical analyses. The TRT gilts gained less BW than CTL gilts (17.3 vs 31.7 kg; P < 0.01) from d 28 to 75 of gestation and gained more BW (29.5 vs 21.9 kg; P < 0.01) from d 75 to 110, but their overall gain from mating to d 110 was lower (61.4 vs 67.2 kg; P < 0.05). Metabolic status during gestation was affected, with TRT gilts having less IGF-1 and urea, and more FFA than CTL gilts on d 75 (P < 0.01), and more urea on d 110 (P < 0.01). Neither growth of suckling piglets nor milk composition in late lactation was affected by treatment. In conclusion, diet deprivation and subsequent compensatory feeding of gestating gilts did not improve lactation performance.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".