135 Growth Performance of Nursery Pigs Fed Antibiotic-Free Diets with Spray Dried Bovine Plasma as an Alternative for Use of High Levels of Zinc Oxide
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The study was designed to evaluate if feeding spray dried bovine plasma (SDP) in low Zn diets would maintain similar growth performance compared with a high Zn diet, as an alternative to high levels of supplemental zinc oxide. Pigs (1,548 Camborough F1 female x 800 boar line; PIC Canada) were weaned at 20 ± 1 d of age (body weight: 5.6 ± 0.2 kg), divided within gender, and allotted to a randomized block design using 48 pens in 2 rooms with 31, 32, or 33 pigs per pen. Feeding phases (P) were (P1) d 0-7, (P2) d 7-21, and (P3) d 21-49. Feed treatments were: 1) positive control (PC) with high supplemental zinc (P1, 3000; P2, 2000, and P3 150 ppm); 2) negative control (NC) with low zinc (P1-P3, 150 ppm); 3) NC + 5% SDP P1; and 4) NC + 5% SDP P1, 2.5% SDP P2. Data were analyzed using PROC MIXED of SAS. Contrast statements were used to test effects of Zn supplementation (PC vs NC) or SDP inclusion in low Zn diets vs the PC or NC diets. Overall, from d 0 to 49, ADFI and ADG was greater (P < 0.01) for pigs fed PC than for NC and SDP treatments. Pigs fed SDP had greater ADG and ADFI than NC pigs (P ≤ 0.02). At d 49, pigs fed the PC high zinc diets weighed 1.6 kg more (P < 0.05) than pigs fed the NC low Zn diets. Supplementation of SDP in low Zn diets increased (P < 0.05) ADFI, ADG, and final BW by 0.55-0.59 kg compared with the NC diets. Supplementation of low zinc diets with SDP improved growth performance but resulted in lower final BW compared with the PC diets containing high zinc.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".