MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389887158 · doi:10.1139/cjas-2023-0082

Impact of dietary zinc and copper levels on ileal and total apparent nutrient digestibility in growing pigs

2023· article· en· W4389887158 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Mohamed Ali Ketata, Marie-Pierre Létourneau-Montminy, Frédéric Guay

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Animal Science · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicTrace Elements in Health
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersMinistère de l'Agriculture, des Pêcheries et de l'Alimentation
KeywordsZincNutrientCopperAnimal scienceBiologyChemistryFood scienceEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aimed to evaluate the effect of dietary zinc (Zn) and copper (Cu) levels on their apparent ileal digestibility (AID) and total tract digestibility (ATTD) and that of calcium (Ca), manganese (Mn), iron (Fe), phosphorus (P), and fiber in pigs. The experiment was carried out with six individuals fitted with a T-cannula. Pigs received one of four diets with two levels of Zn (100 [low] and 500 [high] mg/kg) and Cu (40 [low] and 80 [high] mg/kg). High Zn increased AID of Zn and Mn, but decreased that of Ca ( p < 0.05). High Cu tended to improve AID of Cu, but only when high Zn was used (Interaction Zn × Cu, p = 0.051). ATTD of Zn, Cu, Mn, and P was greater in high Zn ( p < 0.05). High Cu also increased ATTD of Cu, but reduced that of Ca ( p < 0.05) as it likely did for ATTD of P in low Zn (Interaction Zn × Cu, p = 0.065). There was an improving trend for ATTD of NDF (Interaction Zn × Cu, p = 0.069), and ATTD of ADF was increased with a combination of high Zn and high Cu (Interaction Zn × Cu, p < 0.05). This research showed that the levels of Cu and Zn modified the digestibility of minerals but also the degradability of fiber.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
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)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.290 · 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 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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Animal ScienceSame topicTrace Elements in HealthFrench-language works237,207