MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2992964628 · doi:10.1093/jas/skz258.559

PSIII-24 True nutrient and amino acid digestibility of commercial pork-based extruded dog foods using the precision-fed cecectomized rooster assay

2019· article· en· W2992964628 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Patrícia M Oba, Kelly S. Swanson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Animal Science · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicNutrition, Health and Food Behavior
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRoosterDigestion (alchemy)NutrientFood scienceAnimal scienceBiologyChemistryChromatography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Pork-based dog foods are increasing in popularity, but there has been a lack of research conducted on these diets, including information about their digestibility. Therefore, the objective of this experiment was to determine the true nutrient and amino acid (AA) digestibilities of commercial pork-based extruded dog foods using the precision-fed cecectomized rooster assay. Four commercial extruded diets were tested in this study, including three pork formulas (PF1; PF2; PF3) with varying levels of legume content, and a multi-protein formula (MPF), all provided by Champion Petfoods (Alberta, Canada). A precision-fed rooster assay utilizing cecectomized roosters was conducted to determine the true nutrient digestibility and standardized AA digestibilities of the diets tested. All animal procedures were approved by the University of Illinois Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee prior to experimentation. 16 cecectomized roosters (4 roosters/substrate) were randomly assigned to test substrates. After 24h of feed withdrawal, roosters were tube-fed 30g of test substrates. Following crop intubation, excreta (urine and feces) were collected for 48h. Endogenous corrections for AA were made using 5 additional cecectomized roosters. All data were analyzed using the Mixed Models procedure of SAS 9.4. There were no significant differences in true macronutrient digestibilities among diets tested. For most of the indispensable AA, digestibilities were greater than 80%, with some being greater than 90%. For the majority of indispensable and dispensable AA, MPF had higher (P < 0.05) AA digestibilities than the other diets tested. For the majority of indispensable AA, PF1 had the lowest AA digestibilities. In general, the diet containing a mixed protein source had the greatest AA digestibilities, but all diets including those based on pork protein performed well.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.345
Teacher spread0.303 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Animal ScienceSame topicNutrition, Health and Food BehaviorFrench-language works237,207