PSIV-7 Diet nutrient digestibility and growth performance in weaned pigs fed steam-exploded canola meal
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Canola meal (CM) is widely included in swine diets, but its fiber matrix compromises its nutritional value. Whether steam-explosion with high pressure can increase nutrient digestibility of CM and hence growth performance in pigs is unknown. To explore, Brassica napus CM was processed with steam pressure at 700 or 1,100 kPa for 5 min followed by a sudden release of pressure to produce steam-exploded CM7 and CM11, respectively. Four diets containing 20% CM, CM7, CM11, or soybean meal (SBM) were formulated to provide 2.3 Mcal net energy (NE)/kg and 5.1 g standardized ileal digestible lysine/Mcal NE. From 2 weeks post-weaning, 256 pigs (BW, 10 kg) were fed the 4 diets for 4 weeks in a randomized complete block design with 16 blocks and 4 pigs per pen. Apparent total tract digestibility (ATTD) of dry matter (DM), crude protein (CP), and gross energy (GE) was 4.8, 4.3 and 3.7%-units lower (P < 0.05), respectively, for the 3 CM diets than the SBM diet, whereas diet digestible energy (DE) value was not different. Steam-explosion of CM did not affect diet ATTD of DM and GE, but reduced (P < 0.05) diet ATTD of CP. For the entire trial (day 1–28), steam-explosion at either 700 or 1,100 kPa increased (P < 0.05) average daily feed intake (ADFI) of CM, but the CM diet had lower (P < 0.05) ADFI than the SBM diet. Average daily gain (ADG) did not differ among the 4 diets. Consequently, feed efficiency (G:F) was greater (P < 0.05) for the 3 CM diets than the SBM diet. In conclusion, steam-explosion of CM did not increase diet nutrient digestibility or growth performance of 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 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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".