PSX-A-20 Late-Breaking: Potential prebiotic effect of canola meal non-starch polysaccharide hydrolysis products in weaned piglets challenged with enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli F4
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Enzymatically derived non-starch polysaccharide hydrolysis products (HP) may modulate enteric health outcomes in piglets. Thus, responses of weaned piglets to an oral challenge with enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli F4 (ETEC) when fed diets containing canola meal (CM) HP were investigated. The HP were obtained by incubating CM with a multi-carbohydrase (MC) blend. Thirty-five weaned piglets (8.08 ± 0.34 Kg BW) were individually assigned in a completely randomized design to 1 of 5 treatments: UCC (unchallenged control), NC (negative control challenged with ETEC), PC (NC + 0.1% AGP), HP1 (NC + 0.25% HP), HP2 (NC + 0.5% HP). After a seven-day adaptation period, piglets in the UCC group received 5 ml of PBS, whereas those in all other groups were orally challenged with 5 ml (5 × 106 CFU/mL) of ETEC F4. On d 14 all piglets were euthanized for tissue sampling. Data were analyzed using the PROC MIXED procedure of SAS 9.4, with the individual pig as the experimental unit. During the post-challenge period, piglets fed NC diet had lower (P < 0.05) G: F than those fed the PC, whereas the G: F was higher (P < 0.05) for piglets fed the HP-containing diets than that of piglets fed the NC diet. Piglets fed diets containing HP showed lower (P < 0.05) jejunum pH and fecal scores than piglets fed the NC diet. For gene expressions, the HP groups showed a greater level of toll like receptor 2 (TLR2) compared with NC group (P < 0.05). For the HP groups, HP1 had a higher (P < 0.05) level of TLR2 than HP2 treatment. Feeding HP resulted in lower relative abundance of Bifidobacterium in the colon of piglets compared with feeding with NC (P < 0.05). In conclusion, piglets fed diets with CM HP exhibited less severe ETEC-enteritis and had similar effects with AGP.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".