Factors affecting performance response of pigs exposed to different challenge models: a multivariate approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Factors associated with the severity with which different challenge models (CMs) compromise growth performance in pigs were investigated using hierarchical clustering on principal components (HCPC) analysis. One hundred seventy-eight studies reporting growth performance variables (average daily gain [ADG], average daily feed intake [ADFI], gain:feed [GF], and final body weight [FBW]) of a Control (Ct) vs. a Challenged (Ch) group of pigs using different CMs (enteric [ENT], environmental [ENV], lipopolysaccharide [LPS], respiratory [RES], or sanitary condition [SAN] challenges) were included. Studies were grouped by similarity in performance in three clusters (C1, C2, and C3) by HCPC. The effects of CM, cluster, and sex (males [M], females [F], mixed [Mi]) were investigated. Linear (LRP) and quadratic (QRP) response plateau models were fitted to assess the interrelationships between the change in ADG (∆ADG) and ADFI (∆ADFI) and the duration of challenge. All variables increased from C1 through C3, except for GF, which decreased (P < 0.05). LPS was more detrimental to ADG than ENV, RES, and SAN models (P < 0.05). Furthermore, LPS also lowered GF more than all the other CMs (P < 0.05). The ∆ADG independent of ∆ADFI was significant in LPS and SAN (P < 0.05), showed a trend toward the significance in ENT and RES (P < 0.10), and was not significant in ENV (P > 0.10), while the ∆ADG dependent on ∆ADFI was significant in ENT, ENV, and LPS only (P < 0.05). The critical value of ∆ADFI influencing the ∆ADG was significant in pigs belonging to C1 (P < 0.05) but not C2 or C3 (P > 0.10). The ∆ADG independent of duration post-Ch (irreparable portion of growth) was significant in C1 and C2 pigs, whereas the ∆ADFI independent of duration post-Ch (irreparable portion of feed intake) was significant in C1 pigs only (P < 0.05). Moreover, the time for recovery of ADG and ADFI after Ch was significant in pigs belonging to C1 and C2 (P < 0.05). Control F showed reduced ADG compared with Ct-M, and Ch-F showed reduced ADFI compared with Ch-M (P < 0.05). Moreover, the irreparable portion of ΔADG was 4.8 higher in F (-187.7; P < 0.05) compared with M (-39.1; P < 0.05). There are significant differences in growth performance response to CM based on cluster and sex. Furthermore, bacterial lipopolysaccharide appears to be an appropriate noninfectious model for immune stimulation and growth impairment in 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 | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".