The effects of microencapsulated compounds supplementation on growth performance, immune cells, and rectal temperature in weaned pigs by lipopolysaccharides
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A total of forty 21-d-old weaned and crossbred pigs [(Landrace × Yorkshire) × Duroc] with an average initial body weight of 4.43 ± 1.41 kg were used for this 2 wk experiment. There were four treatments. Each treatment had 10 replicates with five pigs per pen. Treatments were as follows: (1) microencapsulated complex of organic acids and essential oils (MOE)−, lipopolysaccharide (LPS)+; (2) MOE−, LPS−; (3) 0.2% MOE+, LPS+; and (4) 0.2% MOE+, LPS−. Final body weight, body weight gain, average daily gain, and average daily feed intake were significantly different between MOE+ and MOE− (P < 0.05). Based on the results of MOE+, crude protein digestibility was significantly higher than for MOE− (P < 0.05). However, LPS+ was significantly higher than LPS− in the 4, 8, 12, and 16 h (P < 0.05). From a comparison of blood profiles, cortisol, tumor necrosis factor-α, interleukin-1β, neutrophil, lymphocyte, red blood cell, hemoglobin, and hematocrit were significantly different between LPS+ and LPS− (P < 0.05). The immunoglobulin G, white blood cell, and eosinophil were significantly different between LPS and MOE treatments (P < 0.05). In summary, MOE had a potentially good effect on growth performance and some part of immune response in weaned pigs.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".