MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388249135 · doi:10.1016/j.animal.2023.101025

SNAPIG: a model to study nutrient digestion and absorption kinetics in growing pigs based on diet and ingredient properties

2023· article· en· W4388249135 on OpenAlexaff
Marijke Schop, Hieu Nguyen-Ba, A.J.M. Jansman, Sonja de Vries, J.L. Ellis, A. Bannink, W.J.J. Gerrits

Bibliographic record

Venueanimal · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Nutrition and Physiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersWageningen University and ResearchMinisterie van Economische Zaken en KlimaatVereniging Diervoederonderzoek NederlandUniversità degli Studi di Sassari
KeywordsDigestion (alchemy)NutrientStarchFood scienceIngredientChemistryCaecumPostprandialComposition (language)Animal scienceBiochemistryBiologyBiotechnologyChromatographyInternal medicineMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Current feed formulation and evaluation practices rely on static values for the nutritional value of feed ingredients and assume additivity. Hereby, the complex interplay among nutrients in the diet and the highly dynamic digestive processes are ignored. Nutrient digestion kinetics and diet × animal interactions should be acknowledged to improve future predictions of the nutritional value of complex diets. Therefore, an in silico nutrient-based mechanistic digestion model for growing pigs was developed: "SNAPIG" (Simulating Nutrient digestion and Absorption kinetics in PIGs). Aiming to predict the rate and extent of nutrient absorption from diets varying in ingredient composition and physicochemical properties, the model represents digestion kinetics of ingested protein, starch, fat, and non-starch polysaccharides, through passage, hydrolysis, absorption, and endogenous secretions of nutrients along the stomach, proximal small intestine, distal small intestine, and caecum + colon. Input variables are nutrient intake and the physicochemical properties (i.e. solubility, and rate and extent of degradability). Data on the rate and extent of starch and protein hydrolysis of different ingredients per digestive segment were derived from in vitro assays. Passage of digesta from the stomach was modelled as a function of feed intake level, dietary nutrient solubility and diet viscosity. Model evaluation included testing against independent data from in vivo studies on nutrient appearance in (portal) blood of growing pigs. When simulating diets varying in physicochemical properties and nutrient source, SNAPIG can explain variation in glucose absorption kinetics (postprandial time of peak, TOP: 20-100 min observed vs 25-98 min predicted), and predict variation in the extent of ileal protein and fat digestion (root mean square prediction errors (RMSPE) = 12 and 16%, disturbance error = 12 and 86%, and concordance correlation coefficient = 0.34 and 0.27). For amino acid absorption, the observed variation in postprandial TOP (61 ± 11 min) was poorly predicted despite accurate mean predictions (58 ± 34 min). Recalibrating protein digestion and amino acid absorption kinetics require data on net-portal nutrient appearance, combined with observations on digestion kinetics, in pigs fed diets varying in ingredient composition. Currently, SNAPIG can be used to forecast the time and extent of nutrient digestion and absorption when simulating diets varying in ingredient and nutrient composition. It enhances our quantitative understanding of nutrient digestion kinetics and identifies knowledge gaps in this field of research. Already useful as research tool, SNAPIG can be coupled with a postabsorptive metabolism model to predict the effects of dietary and feeding-strategies on the pig's growth response.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.963
Threshold uncertainty score0.134

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.193 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations12
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueanimalSame topicAnimal Nutrition and PhysiologyFrench-language works237,207