The Effect of Increasing Dietary Manganese from an Organic Source on the Reproductive Performance of Sows
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this study was to determine the effect of dietary manganese on the reproductive performance of sows. Sows (n = 39; 231 ± 8 kg) were randomly assigned to one of three dietary levels of supplemented Mn (CON: 0 ppm Mn; PRO20: 20 ppm Mn; PRO40: 40 ppm Mn). The experimental treatments were initiated at breeding and continued through two parities. The sows were blocked by parity within each farrowing group. The data were analyzed as a randomized complete block design using the MIXED procedure of SAS with diet as a fixed effect and block as a random effect. The lactation feed intake increased in the PRO20 sows compared to the CON and PRO40 sows (p < 0.05). The PRO20 and PRO40 sows farrowed piglets with improved average daily gain from birth to weaning (CON 214 g/day; PRO20 237 g/day; 220 g/day; p < 0.05) compared to the CON sows. The milk fat content was lower in the PRO20 (5.5%) and PRO40 sows (6.1%; p < 0.05) compared to the CON sows (7.8%), possibly due to increased milk demand. Supplementary dietary Mn throughout two gestation and lactation cycles led to improved birth weights and pre-weaning growth of piglets.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".