MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4223621435 · doi:10.1093/jas/skac064.232

PSII-16 Enterid Reduced <i>E. Coli</i> Colonization in the Gastro-Intestinal Tract of Young Pigs

2022· article· en· W4223621435 on OpenAlexaff
Aileen Joy L Mercado, Huyen Tran, Peter Karnezos, Brenda de Rodas, Stacie Crowder

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Animal Science · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Nutrition and Physiology
Canadian institutionsAgribrands Purina (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFecesAnimal scienceEnterotoxigenic Escherichia coliAppetiteMedicineBiologyInternal medicineEscherichia coliMicrobiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The aim of the present study is to assess the impact of Enterid feed additive (PMI Additives) on the health status of newly-weaned pigs challenged with Enterotoxigenic E. coli (F4/K88). Seventy-two newly-weaned piglets of mixed sex were weighed and sorted into groups of 12 pens (3 gilts and 3 barrows each pen). Each pen was then randomly assigned into 1 of 3 treatments, consisting of a non-challenged group (NC), E.coli-challenged group (ETEC), and ETEC supplemented with 0.10% Enterid. Pigs were treated with Baytril upon arrival and were provided their respective diets and water ad libitum. All pigs except NC were challenged with F4/K88 strain 181016 E. coli on d 10 and d 11. Clinical observations (fecal scores, respiration rate, appetite, attitude, edema), rectal temperature and E. coli shedding were measured daily beginning on d9 until the end of the study (d 20). Clinical outcomes were analyzed using Mixed procedure in SAS following a completely randomized design with initial weight as covariate and day post challenge as a repeated measure parameter. Clinical measurements, except fecal scores, were all rated normal and so were not analyzed statistically. There were no differences among treatments in E. coli shedding prior to the challenge (2.3 log cfu/ml, P > 0.20). Immediately post challenge, however, E. coli shedding for the ETEC increased by 12 log (14.4 log cfu/ml, P < 0.05) and remained elevated for 4-5 d. Supplementation with Enterid resulted in a 2-log reduction in E. coli shedding during the first 3 d post-challenge (P < 0.10) and returned to pre-challenge level after 5 d. No clear differences in rectal temperature were observed among treatments. E. coli challenge resulted in poorer fecal quality (d3-5, P < 0.05), with Enterid not influencing the response (P > 0.20). The current results support the ability of Enterid to reduce E. coli colonization in the gut of pigs challenged with E. coli.

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 score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.229 · 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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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