MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3106952308 · doi:10.1093/jas/skaa054.310

PSIV-21 Pellet processing reduces variability of corn soybean meal-based diet digestibility in growing pigs

2020· article· en· W3106952308 on OpenAlexaff
Élisabeth Chassé, Frédéric Guay, Marie-Pierre Létourneau-Montminy

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Animal Science · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Nutrition and Physiology
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPelletSoybean mealDry matterMealAnimal scienceChemistryFood scienceCompletely randomized designCrossover studyDigestion (alchemy)BiologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This study was conducted to determine the effect of pelleting on the digestibility of corn-soybean meal-based diet in growing pigs. Two trials with 6 pigs cannulated at the distal ileum were conducted. In each trial, pigs were assigned to each treatment following a crossover design. In each experiment, the same diet, composed of corn and soybean meal with 10% wheat from two different feed mills, was served in pellet or mash form. Pelleting allowed an increase in digestibility in one of the trials. Apparent ileal digestibility (AID) of dry matter (DM), crude protein (CP) and digestible energy (DE) were improved with pelleting by 8, 12 and 9% (P< 0.01). The AID of amino acids (AA) was also improved (P< 0.05). Apparent total tract digestibility (ATTD) was increased by pelleting in DM, CP and DE by 5, 7 and 6% respectively (P< 0.01). The digestibility of the mash diet in experiment 1 was lower than in the pelleted diet in the experiment 1 and both diets in experiment 2 as shown by the interaction Pelleting X Trial which was significant for the AID and ATTD of DM, CP and DE (P< 0.01). Therefore, in experiment 1, pelleting allows to improve the digestibility of diet to the same level as in experiment 2. The AID of CP was higher by 37% in the mash diet from the second experiment compared to the one in the first experiment. Even though the same ingredients were chosen in the two experiments, this shows the variability in digestibility existing between different feed mills and ingredient sources. This difference was not observed in pelleted diets. The results obtained in these two trials show that pelleting can reduce the variability of digestibility and then give a good digestibility of diets even if the ingredients are of different quality or sources.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.227 · 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Animal Science→Same topicAnimal Nutrition and Physiology→French-language works237,207→