MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2917928101 · doi:10.3389/fvets.2019.00019

Role of Feed Processing on Gut Health and Function in Pigs and Poultry: Conundrum of Optimal Particle Size and Hydrothermal Regimens

2019· review· en· W2917928101 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Veterinary Science · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Nutrition and Physiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsFunction (biology)Particle sizeFood scienceParticle (ecology)Hydrothermal circulationBiologyBusinessBiotechnologyGeneticsEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The current feed processing technologies are such that ingredient choices and diet form are refined to improve feed intake and nutrient utilization efficiency. Finer feed particle size enables optimal nutrient utilization and enhances animal performance due to increased surface area allowing better contact with digestive enzymes. Moreover, adequate diminution of feed ingredients is beneficial to feed manufacturing processes such as mixing and hydrothermal processes including pelleting, extrusion and expansion. However, emerging trends in consumer and regulatory demands for restriction or cessation of animal production practices such as use of antimicrobial growth promoters are challenging current approaches to feed processing. For example, there is limit as to the fineness of the particle size, as very fine particles negatively affect gut health due to higher incidences of stomach ulceration in pigs and gizzard dysfunction in poultry. Coarse particle size increases stomach and hindgut acidification which may be beneficial in controlling proliferation of enteric pathogens such as salmonella and E. coli. Optimal particle size could be designed in the grinding process using roller or hammer mill. However, since most commercial pigs and poultry diets are subjected to hydrothermal processes, additional reduction of feed particle size is inevitable. The need to achieve high physical quality and to reduce potential levels of feed-borne pathogens such as Salmonella has led to the application of relatively high conditioning temperatures during conventional hydrothermal processes, a practice that does not favour high nutrient utilisation and stability of heat sensitive feed additives such as feed enzymes. Therefore, with evolving pig and poultry production practices, the quality of feed products will no longer be appreciated only in terms of supplying nutrients, but also in terms of impact on feed hygienic status, efficacy of feed additives, animal health and food safety. The aim of the paper is to give an overview of available literature data on the role of feed processing on gut health and function with specific focus on particle size and hydrothermal processing. In addition, influence of feed processing on efficacy of exogenous feed enzymes will be discussed.

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.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.963
Threshold uncertainty score0.228

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.247 · 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