Estimating Amino Acid Requirements in Real-Time for Precision-Fed Pigs: The Challenge of Variability among Individuals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aimed to measure protein deposition (PD) in pigs fed with daily tailored diets where either dietary lysine (Lys) or threonine (Thr) were provided at independent levels (ignoring an ideal ratio). A total of 95 growing pigs (35 kg body weight (BW)) with electronic ear tags granting them access to automatic feeders were randomly assigned to treatments. The setup was an unbalanced 2 × 5 factorial arrangement with Lys and Thr provided at five levels (i.e., 60%, 80%, 100%, 120%, and 140% of the estimated individual requirements of Lys and Thr), resulting in 25 treatments for 21 days. The observed PD variation to Lys and Thr provisions was large, with Lys and Thr intake explaining only 11% of the variation. Cluster analysis discriminated pigs with low (167 g/d, n = 16), medium (191 g/d, n = 38), and high (213 g/d, n = 37) PD, but with a similar amino acid intake. Differences in PD were associated with differences in nutrient efficiency of utilization. Providing Lys and Thr in a factorial mode, ignoring an ideal ratio, did not decrease the variability in PD. Future research efforts should focus on identifying and investigating the sources of interindividual variability—a necessary step before final recommendations can be made for AA in precision-fed 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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".