MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3128818623 · doi:10.1139/cjas-2020-0076

Digestibility of amino acids in pigs fed distillers dried grains with solubles derived from corn, sorghum, and triticale

2020· article· en· W3128818623 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Chan Sol Park, Darryl Ragland, O. Adeola

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Animal Science · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Nutrition and Physiology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDistillers grainsChemistryFood scienceSorghumValineMethionineTriticaleLatin squareIsoleucineAmino acidAnimal scienceLeucineFermentationAgronomyBiologyBiochemistryRumen

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An experiment was conducted to determine the standardized ileal digestibility (SID) of amino acids (AA) in distillers dried grains with solubles derived from corn (C-DDGS), sorghum (S-DDGS), and triticale (T-DDGS) fed to growing pigs. A total of 16 barrows [initial body weight (BW) = 23.1 ± 2.03 kg] surgically fitted with T-cannulas at the distal ileum were divided into four groups based on BW and assigned to a quadruplicated 4 × 2 incomplete Latin square design with four dietary treatments and two experimental periods. Three diets containing C-DDGS, S-DDGS, or T-DDGS, as well as a nitrogen-free diet, were fed in each experimental period consisting of 5 d of adaptation and 2 d of ileal digesta collection. Pigs fed S-DDGS had less (P < 0.05) SID of histidine, isoleucine, leucine, and methionine compared with those fed T-DDGS, which were less (P < 0.05) than the values observed for pigs fed C-DDGS. The SID of arginine, phenylalanine, threonine, and valine in C-DDGS were greater (P < 0.05) than in S-DDGS but were not different from those in T-DDGS. The SID of lysine in C-DDGS was greater (P < 0.05) than in S-DDGS and T-DDGS. In conclusion, AA in S-DDGS were less digestible than those in C-DDGS and T-DDGS.

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 score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.185 · 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

Citations2
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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