PSVI-18 Establishing ideal inclusion rate of fermented soybean meal (FSBM) in nursery rations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract To determine the optimal level of fermented soybean meal (FSBM; Fermex 200, Purina Animal Nutrition, Arden Hills, MN) in nursery diets, a total of 176 weaned pigs (5.96 kg BW) were blocked by initial BW and allotted to 1 of 4 treatments: Control consisted of an enzymatic soybean protein (HP 300, Hamlet Protein, Horsens, Denmark)-poultry byproduct diet or formulated with 5%, 10% and 15% FSBM to achieve FSBM1, FSBM2, and FSBM3 treatments. Pigs remained on the same dietary treatment for phase 1 (d 0–14) and 2 (d 14–29), while a common diet was fed in phase 3 (d 29–40). Individual pig weights and pen feed disappearance were recorded weekly. Blood was taken via jugular venipuncture and analyzed for complete blood cell count on d 0, 14, 29 and 40 from one pig/pen (n = 44) that represented the average BW for each pen. Data were analyzed using MIXED procedures of SAS (Cary, NC) with dietary treatment as the fixed effect, and initial BW block as the random effect. Orthogonal contrasts were performed to test for linear, quadratic and cubic responses to increasing levels of FSBM. A quadratic response to increasing FSBM was observed in ADG (P = 0.06) and ADFI (P = 0.04) during phase 1&2 (d 0–29). Moreover, the heaviest BW was observed in pigs fed 10% FSBM on d 29 (quadratic, P = 0.06), however the difference diminished by the end of the trial. A tendency for a linear increase with increasing level of FSBM was observed in overall feed efficiency (d 0–40, P = 0.07). Pigs fed 10% FSBM had the lowest WBC, neutrophil, and red blood cell count. Results of this study suggest FSBM fed to pigs improves growth performance and alters blood cell characteristics, and 10% is the optimal level of FSBM to include in early nursery diets.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".