Improving the estimation of amino acid requirements to maximize nitrogen retention in precision feeding for growing-finishing pigs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Precision feeding requires a mathematical model to estimate standardized ileal digestible (SID) lysine (Lys) requirements (SIDLysR) in real time. However, this type of model requires constant calibration updates. The objective of this study was to review the calibration of the model used to estimate the real-time Lys requirements of individual growing-finishing pigs. A digestibility trial (n = 10) was conducted to evaluate amino acids digestibility during the growing and finishing phases. Additionally, 120 pigs were used in two 28-day growth experiments conducted as completely randomized design with growing (25 ± 2.1 kg BW, n = 60; 10 pigs per treatment) or finishing barrows (68.1 ± 6 kg BW, n = 60; 10 pigs per treatment). In each experiment, the pigs were divided into six equal treatment groups and fed 60%, 70%, 80%, 90%, 100% or 110% of their estimated individual SIDLysR. The Lys requirement of each pig was estimated daily using a real-time model. Body composition was measured with dual-energy X-ray densitometry on day 1 and 28 of the experiments. Average daily feed intake increased quadratically (P < 0.05) during both growth phases. Maximum average daily gain (ADG) (0.98 kg) and maximum protein deposition (PD; 170 g/day) were observed in growing pigs fed 100% of the estimated SIDLysR (P < 0.001). During the growing period, PD in BW gain (17% to 19%) and N efficiency (52% to 65%) increased linearly (P < 0.01) with increasing inclusion rates of SID Lys. Finishing pigs had maximum ADG (1.2 kg/day) when they were fed 100% of the requirements. However, the amount of protein in BW gain (13% to 16%) and N efficiency (40% to 55%) increased linearly (P < 0.01) with increasing inclusion rates of SID Lys. In conclusion, the model proposed for precision feeding is correctly calibrated to predict SIDLysR that maximize PD and ADG of average pigs from 25 to 50 kg BW. Still, there is an opportunity to improve the estimation of SIDLysR and N retention in individual pigs by better representing the individual proportion of protein in BW gain and the factors controlling the efficiency of Lys utilization in individual 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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".