MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4365150332 · doi:10.1139/cjas-2022-0136

Effects of sugarcane extract on growth and diarrhea of growing piglets

2023· article· en· W4365150332 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kai Wang, Xin Ren, Xiangxing Shen, Yansen Li, Yangchun Xia, Zhaojian Li, Chunmei Li

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Animal Science · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Nutrition and Physiology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiarrheaAnimal scienceIleumMalondialdehydeDuodenumCatalaseBiologyCryptIncidence (geometry)AntioxidantInternal medicineVeterinary medicineMedicineEndocrinologyBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This experiment evaluated the effects of sugarcane extract (SCE) on growing pigs' diarrhea incidence, serum immunity, intestinal morphology, and antioxidant enzyme activity. A total of 116 52-day-old commercial pigs (Duroc × Landrace × Jiaxing Black, average weight of 11 ± 1 kg) were randomly allocated to control (CON, basal diet) and 1% SCE group (SCEG, basal diet + 1% SCE). The experiment lasted four weeks. Compared with CON, diarrhea incidence (SCEG: 74.11% versus CON: 54.76%) and diarrhea index (SCEG: 83.65% versus CON: 73.61%) dropped largely in pigs supplemented with SCE. Villus height in the duodenum ( p < 0.01) and the ratio of villus height to crypt depth ( p < 0.05) increased in SCEG. Dietary SCE enhanced the activity of catalase (CAT) capacity, and decreased tumor necrosis factor α, and malondialdehyde levels in serum ( p < 0.05). CAT activity in the ileum increased ( p < 0.05) in piglets supplemented with SCE. Thus, dietary supplementation with SCE improved diarrhea incidence, serum antioxidant capacity and immunity, and intestinal villus morphology and may be used as an efficient antibiotic alternative in weaned piglet feed.

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 score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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