Dietary fatty acid content and thickness of plantar pads in gilts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this study was to test a diet enriched in the most abundant components of foot fat pads (oleic and palmitic acid) to increase its thickness in gilts. We evaluated the effects of two oleic and palmitic acid dietary concentrations (control and test) and three treatment durations (35, 45, and 65 d) on 116 gilts (Landrace × Large White), all 180-d-old and slaughtered at the end of the study. Both test and control diets contained 5.9% total fat. The control diet contained 0.9% oleic acid and 0.6% palmitic acid; the test diet contained 1.9% and 1.2%, respectively. Body weight (BW), backfat (BF), lateral, and medial plantar pad thickness from the left rear leg were measured. No significant differences were detected for BW or BF between the test and control groups. The lateral pad was always thicker than the medial one (P < 0.001). No significant difference for plantar pad thickness was detected for the 35 d treatment. For the other treatments, thickness increased with respect to the control group (P < 0.01); the percentage of increase ranged from 20.8% (lateral side, 45 d treatment) to 37.8% (lateral side, 65 d treatment). Its effects on foot health must still be demonstrated.
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 | 0.002 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".