MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3110586611 · doi:10.1093/jas/skaa054.163

257 Young Scholar Presentation: Using an integrated systems biology platform to determine the mode of action of feed additives in nursery pig diets

2020· article· en· W3110586611 on OpenAlexaff
Michaela P. Trudeau, Huyen Tran, Brenda de Rodas, T.P. Karnezos, Andrés Gómez, Chi Chen, Pedro E Urriola, G. C. Shurson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Animal Science · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGut microbiota and health
Canadian institutionsAgribrands Purina (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMetabolomicsBiologyWeaningAntibioticsChlortetracyclineFood scienceMicrobiomeMetaboliteMetabolomeGut floraIleumFeed additiveAnimal scienceBiochemistryBioinformatics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The mechanisms of action for antibiotic growth promotion are poorly understood, making it difficult to select effective alternatives that are capable of providing similar responses. In order to evaluate the complete impact of supplementing antibiotics and other feed additives to nursery pigs, an integrated systems biology platform encompasses the merging of traditional nutrition models with gut physiology, nutrition and omics technologies. The objective of this study was to evaluate the growth response, metabolic responses, and intestinal microbiome composition of nursery pigs fed antibiotics. Antibiotic diets containing chlortetracycline and sulfamethazine (AB), and diets containing no antibiotics (CON) were fed in 3 trials. Pigs were weighed at d 10, 21, and 42 post-weaning and ADG, ADFI, and G:F was calculated. On d 42, one pig/pen was selected for blood, cecal, and ileum content collection to assess metabolomic profiles via liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry. The composition of bacterial communities in those samples was determined by sequencing the V4 region of the 16s rRNA bacterial gene in the MiSeq platform. Metabolomics and microbiome data were analyzed using multivariate approaches and growth performance data were analyzed using a generalized mixed model. Pigs fed AB were heavier (P < 0.05) on day 42. There were also significant differences (P < 0.05) in the cecal and serum metabolite profile of pigs fed AB compared with CON. However, there were no changes in bile acid or short chain fatty acid concentrations in cecal samples when feeding AB. Although AB had no effect on alpha or beta microbiome diversity, the abundance of specific bacterial taxa shifted significantly (P < 0.05). These findings suggest that feeding antibiotics improve growth, alter metabolism, and affect the abundance of specific taxonomic groups of bacteria in the gut. In the future, this approach will be utilized to evaluate antibiotic alternatives for nursery 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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.171
Threshold uncertainty score0.572

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1710.035

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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.299 · 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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Animal Science→Same topicGut microbiota and health→French-language works237,207→