151 Energy Metabolism, Digestive and Absorptive Capacity, and Fecal Microbiome of Nursery Piglets Selected for Feed Efficiency
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Improving feed efficiency (FE) plays an important role in the economic and environmental sustainability of the swine industry. Genetic selection based on low estimated breeding value for feed conversion ratio (EBV_FCR) can effectively improve FE. This study investigated the growth performance, nutrient and energy digestibility, activity of hydrolyses, expression of nutrient transporters and tight junction proteins, and fecal microbiome of nursery pigs selected for high and low feed efficiency. A total of 128 pigs weaned at 21 + 2 days were selected from parents of low and high EBV_FCR calculated based on phenotypes for FCR during growing-finishing stage. Pigs were fed with corn-soybean meal-based diets in a two-phase feeding program for 4 weeks under similar rearing conditions. The results revealed that there were no differences in average daily feed intake, average body weight gain, FCR, energy, and nutrient digestibility between the two groups. Moreover, enzyme activity kinetics results showed no differences in the maximal activity of alkaline phosphatase, sucrase, maltase, and maltase-glucoamylase between the two groups (p > 0.05). Real-time PCR analyses showed that SGLT1, ASCT2, PepT1, EAAC1, and BoAT1 mRNA abundances were not affected by the pig groups (p > 0.05). There were also no significant differences in claudin-1 and ZO-1 protein abundances on the jejunum membrane between the two pig groups. The two pig groups had similar fecal microbial taxonomic composition and function. However, the microbiota diversity results showed that the high-efficiency pig group has higher species evenness, and there is a trend (p < 0.084) for beta diversity difference, which indicates that high-efficiency pigs might have a more homogenous and healthier gut environment. In conclusion, nursery pigs selected for high and low feed efficiency based on parents EBV_FCR did not differ in growth performance, nutrient digestibility and absorptive capacities, microbiota composition and function.
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) | 0.000 | 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 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".