MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4383187527 · doi:10.1093/jas/skad193

Microencapsulation protected <i>Lactobacillus</i> viability and its activity in modulating the intestinal microbiota in newly weaned piglets

2023· article· en· W4383187527 on OpenAlexafffund
Linyan Li, Fugui Yin, Xiaoyin Wang, Chongwu Yang, Haibo Yu, Dion Lepp, Qi Wang, Martin Lessard, Luca Lo Verso, Martin Mondor, Chengbo Yang, Shaoping Nie, Joshua Gong

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Animal Science · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicProbiotics and Fermented Foods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
FundersChina Scholarship CouncilMinistry of Education, IndiaAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaSwine Innovation Porc
KeywordsLactobacillus rhamnosusBiologyColostrumLactobacillusWeaningFood scienceProbioticMicrobiologyEnterotoxigenic Escherichia coliAnimal scienceFermentationBacteriaEscherichia coliImmunologyEnterotoxinBiochemistryAntibody

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lactobacilli are sensitive to heat, which limits their application as probiotics in livestock production. Lactobacillus rhamnosus LB1 was previously shown to reduce enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli (ETEC) and Salmonella infections in pigs. To investigate its potential in the application, the bacterium was microencapsulated and examined for its survival from feed pelleting and long-term storage as well as its function in modulating pig intestinal microbiota. The in vitro studies showed that freshly microencapsulated Lactobacillus rhamnosus LB1 had viable counts of 9.03 ± 0.049 log10 colony-forming units/g, of which only 0.06 and 0.87 Log of viable counts were reduced after storage at 4 and 22 °C for 427 d. The viable counts of encapsulated Lactobacillus rhamnosus LB1 were 1.06 and 1.54 Log higher in the pelleted and mash feed, respectively, than the non-encapsulated form stored at 22 °C for 30 d. In the in vivo studies, 80 piglets (weaned at 21 d of age) were allocated to five dietary treatments for a 10-d growth trial. The dietary treatments were the basal diet (CTL) and basal diet combined with either non-encapsulated LB1 (NEP), encapsulated LB1 (EP), bovine colostrum (BC), or a combination of encapsulated LB1 and bovine colostrum (EP-BC). The results demonstrated that weaning depressed feed intake and reduced growth rates in pigs of all the treatments during 21 to 25 d of age; however, the body weight gain was improved during 25 to 31 d of age in all groups with the numerically highest increase in the EP-BC-fed pigs during 21 to 31 d of age. Dietary treatments with EP, particularly in combination with BC, modulated pig intestinal microbiota, including an increase in Lactobacillus relative abundance. These results suggest that microencapsulation can protect Lactobacillus rhamnosus LB1 against cell damage from a high temperature during processing and storage and there are possible complementary effects between EP and BC.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.219 · 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

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Animal Science→Same topicProbiotics and Fermented Foods→French-language works237,207→