MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3021701088 · doi:10.1093/jas/skaa157

The effect of reduced dietary glycine and serine and supplemental threonine on growth performance, protein deposition in carcass and viscera, and skin collagen abundance of nursery pigs fed low crude protein diets

2020· article· en· W3021701088 on OpenAlexafffund
Kayla E Silva, Lee‐Anne Huber, Wilfredo D Mansilla, Anna K. Shoveller, John K Htoo, J.P. Cant, C. F. M. de Lange

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Animal Science · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Nutrition and Physiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersOntario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural AffairsSwine Innovation PorcOntario Pork
KeywordsThreonineAnimal scienceGlycineComposition (language)ChemistryAmino acidBody weightWeight gainBiologyFood scienceBiochemistrySerineEndocrinologyEnzyme

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Thirty five barrows (initial body weight [BW]: 15.1 ± 1.0 kg) were used to determine the effect of partially replacing Gly + Ser with Thr in reduced crude protein (CP) diets on growth performance, protein deposition in carcass and viscera, and skin collagen abundance during the late nursery phase to 25 kg BW. Pigs were individually fed one of five iso-nitrogenous diets (n = 7) for 21 d. The basal diet met estimated essential amino acids (AA) requirements by using all essential AA plus Gly and Ser in free form (CON; 12.1% CP; as-fed, analyzed contents). The remaining four diets were formulated by reducing total Gly and Ser concentrations to 60% or 20% of the CON diet. The N removed with Gly and Ser was replaced with either crystalline Thr or Glu. Total analyzed Thr made up either 1.59% (T1; 12.5% CP) or 2.34% (T2; 12.2% CP) of the Thr-supplemented diets, and total analyzed Glu made up either 3.47% (G1; 12.7% CP) or 4.64% (G2; 12.9% CP) of the Glu-supplemented diets. Pigs were slaughtered on day 21 to determine body composition and skin collagen abundance via bright field microscopy. Overall, average daily gain (ADG) and G:F and final carcass weights were greater for pigs fed diets supplemented with Glu (G1 + G2) vs. those fed diets supplemented with Thr (T1 + T2; P < 0.05, P = 0.060, and P = 0.050 for ADG, G:F, and final carcass weight, respectively); intermediate values were observed for CON. Nitrogen retention in carcass plus viscera and the AA profile of deposited protein in the carcass were not influenced by dietary treatment. Pigs fed the T2 and G2 diets had greater retention of Thr (vs. CON and G2) and Glu (vs. CON and T2) in the viscera protein, respectively (P < 0.05). The apparent utilization efficiency of standardized ileal digestible Thr for protein deposition in carcass plus viscera was less for pigs fed T2 (15.1%) vs. those fed CON (56.7%) or G2 (58.6% ± 2.9%) diets (P < 0.001). Only pigs fed T1 had skin collagen abundance not different from CON; pigs fed G1, G2, and T2 had reduced skin collagen abundance compared with CON and T1 (P < 0.01). Using Glu as an N source when Gly and Ser were reduced to 60% and 20% of CON in reduced CP diets maintained ADG for pigs between 15 and 25 kg BW, whereas supplying Thr as a N source reduced ADG and carcass weight. When dietary Gly and Ser were supplied at 60% of CON, only Thr supplementation rescued skin collagen abundance. Therefore, supplemental Thr at excess levels is not sufficient to replace N from Gly and Ser in reduced CP diets fed to late nursery pigs, despite supporting skin collagen abundance as a secondary indicator of Gly status.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations8
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Animal ScienceSame topicAnimal Nutrition and PhysiologyFrench-language works237,207