MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Effects of nonanoic acid on performance and hematological and biochemical parameters for weaned piglets

2022· article· en· W4293254265 on OpenAlexaff
M. H. L. Bento, Elizabeth A. Lewis, Regiane R. Santos, Francesc Molist, Philip McGuire, Kurt Richardson

Bibliographic record

VenueAnimal Feed Science and Technology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Nutrition and Physiology
Canadian institutionsVictoria Park
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFood scienceChemistryAnimal scienceBiologyBiochemistryBiotechnology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nonanoic acid (NA) is one of a group of straight-chain aliphatic aldehydes, acids and their derivatives with a long and established history of use as flavors in human food and animal feed. The use of this group of flavors in feed was evaluated by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) in 2013 and in the absence of data in the target species, maximum safe levels were derived from available toxicology studies of 12 mg for piglets, and 20 mg for grower/finisher pigs and sows per kg complete feed containing 120 g/kg moisture. These established safe levels limit the practical use of NA as a flavoring in swine diets and the objective of this study was to evaluate the tolerance to piglets of NA at significantly higher dietary levels that are relevant to commercial feeding practices. Three hundred eighty four (192 males, 192 females), cross bred [Tempo x (Large White x Landrace)] post-weaned piglets with an initial body weight (BW) of between 6.5 and 8.5 kg and age of 26 days were used in a 42-day tolerance study. Piglets were randomly assigned to one of 64 pens containing either 6 males or 6 females. One of 4 dietary treatments were fed to the piglets containing NA at 0, 100, 300 or 1000 mg/kg complete feed. General health and performance were monitored for the duration of the study. At day 42, blood samples were taken and piglets were sacrificed and necropsied for pathological examination of the digestive tract . NA supplementation had no effect (P > 0.05) on the daily feed intake (DFI), average daily gain (ADG), feed conversion ratio (FCR) or fecal consistency over the 42-day period. No treatment related effects (P > 0.05) on hematology or blood biochemistry parameters were reported and all values fell within normal ranges. There were no treatment-related findings from macroscopic and microscopic examination of digestive tissues. The results of the study support the tolerance to piglets of NA in feed treated with 1000 mg/kg complete feed of which 720 mg/kg was recovered, which is considerably higher than anticipated practical conditions of use as a feed flavoring.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.229
Threshold uncertainty score0.433

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.197 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnimal Feed Science and TechnologySame topicAnimal Nutrition and PhysiologyFrench-language works237,207