MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2919114847 · doi:10.1139/cjas-2018-0124

Evaluating the effects of adaptation length, dietary electrolyte balance, and energy source on ileal endogenous amino acid losses in pigs fed nitrogen-free diets

2019· article· en· W2919114847 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
S.A. Adedokun, Kun Dong, D. L. Harmon

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Animal Science · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Nutrition and Physiology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of Food and AgricultureU.S. Department of Agriculture
KeywordsRandomized block designAmino acidArginineEndogenyGlycineAnimal scienceDry matterChemistryThreonineNitrogen balanceInternal medicineSerineBiochemistryNitrogenBiologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sixteen cannulated pigs were used to evaluate the effect of dietary electrolyte balance (DEB, low vs. high), energy source (cornstarch vs. dextrose), and adaptation length (3–4 or 6–7 d) to the diets on basal ileal endogenous amino acid (EAA) losses in pigs fed nitrogen-free diets (NFD) in a randomized complete block design with a 2 × 2 × 2 factorial arrangement of treatments. Each of the two phases lasted 7 d with a 12 h digesta collection on days 3, 4, 6, and 7. Pigs received a daily feed allowance of 4% of their body weight. There was no significant three-way interaction. Longer adaptation length increased (P < 0.05) ileal endogenous losses of N, arginine (Arg), glycine (Gly), proline (Pro), and total amino acid (AA). Dextrose-based NFD resulted in higher (P < 0.05) ileal dry matter digestibility and EAA losses (13 of 18 AAs) compared with pigs fed cornstarch-based NFD. High DEB resulted in a decrease (P < 0.05) in endogenous threonine, cysteine, Gly, and serine losses. The two-way interaction between energy source and DEB was significant for N, total AA, and five AAs with a combination of dextrose and low DEB resulting in higher (P < 0.05) losses. Results from this study show that NFD could be fed for a shorter period of time (3–4 d) with results that are comparable to a 7 d adaptation period except for N, Arg, Gly, and Pro.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations3
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Animal Science→Same topicAnimal Nutrition and Physiology→French-language works237,207→