MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4402540901 · doi:10.1093/jas/skae234.756

PSLBII-4 The effect of standardized ileal digestible sulfur amino acid intake during late gestation on gilt whole-body nitrogen retention and subsequent litter performance

2024· article· en· W4402540901 on OpenAlexaff
Cristhiam J Munoz Alfonso, Lee‐Anne Huber, Crystal L Levesque

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Animal Science · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Nutrition and Physiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLitterAnimal scienceGestationSulfurNitrogenChemistryAmino acidBiologyBiochemistryPregnancyAgronomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Gestating gilts [n = 27; body weight (BW) = 158 ± 5.5 kg] were used to determine the effect of standardized ileal digestible (SID) sulfur amino acid (SAA) intake during late gestation on whole-body nitrogen (N) retention and subsequent litter performance. Gilts were assigned to one of two experimental diets that provided SAA at 60 or 200 % of estimated requirements during late gestation (0.29 and 0.92 % SID SAA, respectively; n = 15 and 12, respectively; Table 1 and 2). Each gilt received 2.53 kg of the assigned diet between gestation d 90 and farrowing; standard lactation and nursery diets were provided to gilts after farrowing and offspring after weaning, respectively. Gilt whole-body N balance was determined between d 107 and 109 of gestation using total urine collection and fecal grab-sampling. After farrowing, litters were standardized to 13 piglets and were not offered creep feed. Whole-body N retention was greater in gilts fed the diet containing 0.92 vs. 0.29 % SID SAA in late gestation (27.2 vs. 19.3 ± 1.8 g/d; P < 0.05; Table 3), but the number of piglets born alive, litter birth weight, subsequent piglet growth rates, and litter size at weaning were not different between treatment groups. The post-weaning growth performance of offspring was also not influenced by maternal dietary treatment in late gestation (Table 4). At farrowing, the post-absorptive plasma concentration of Cys tended to be less (P = 0.072) and taurine was greater (P < 0.01) for gilts fed 0.92 vs. 0.29 % SID SAA in late gestation; however, there were no differences in plasma SAA metabolites concentrations for gilts at weaning or offspring at birth (Table 5. At weaning, offspring from gilts fed 0.92 % SID SAA had greater plasma homocysteine (P < 0.05) and plasma Cys concentrations (tendency; P = 0.072) vs. offspring from gilts fed 0.29 % SID SAA in late gestation. Three weeks after weaning, plasma taurine concentration was less (P < 0.05) for offspring from gilts fed 0.92 vs. 0.29 % SID SAA in late gestation (Table 6). Six weeks after weaning, plasma glutathione concentration tended to be less (P = 0.057) for offspring from gilts fed 0.92 vs 0.29 % SID SAA in late gestation. When SAA were fed below estimated requirements during late gestation, whole-body N retention was reduced, but fetal growth appeared to be maintained, likely at the expense of maternal N retention. Such divergences in dietary SAA supply in late gestation had no effect on subsequent offspring growth performance, but it appeared that offspring SAA metabolism was impacted until at least 6 wk after weaning. The influence of differences in sulfur AA metabolites on offspring performance beyond the nursery phase remains unknown. Therefore, carry-over effects of maternal SAA supply in late gestation should be considered when developing feeding recommendations for gestating gilts.

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.229 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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