MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402540964 · doi:10.1093/jas/skae234.454

208 Assessment of a new oral neonatal supplement for lambs

2024· article· en· W4402540964 on OpenAlexaff
Brenda Ralston, Andrea M. Hanson, Denis Nagel, Kendall Beaugrand, Crystal Schatz, Joe Ross, Merle S. Olson, Nick Allan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Animal Science · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPediatric health and respiratory diseases
Canadian institutionsChinook Regional Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnimal scienceBiologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The objective of this study was to evaluate an easy to administer and economical oral nutritional supplement for neonatal lambs. Neonates are at risk of nutrient deficiencies because of maternal deficiencies, minimal body stores at birth and decreased nutritional intake. The pre-ruminant lamb relies solely on milk for adequate immunity and nutrition until they begin ingesting forages. Insufficiencies can lead to increased mortality and morbidity. However, deficiencies in the ewe are common due to variation in management, feeding and health protocols. A total of 10 lambs (5 sets of twins) were enrolled into the study. The lambs were divided into two groups (one twin from each set) received a treatment of an oral vitamin-mineral supplement (VitaFerst-Care) 3 mL and the control lambs a saline solution of 3 mL, all at 3 d of age (d0). Blood samples were collected, prior to, and again following supplementation (d 0, d 21) by jugular venipuncture. Vitamin A, vitamin E, iron (Fe) and selenium (Se) concentrations were determined in blood serum/plasma of the lambs by HPLC. Kidney and liver function markers were analyzed using HESKA DC5X veterinary analyzer to confirm the safety of the supplement. Variables tested included alkaline phosphatase (ALP), alanine aminotransferase (ALT), blood urea nitrogen (BUN), creatinine (CREA), glucose (GLU), total protein (TP), total bilirubin (T-BILI), albumin (ALB), phosphorus (PHOS), calcium (CA), cholesterol (CHOL), and gamma-glutamyl transferase (GGT). All lambs remained with their mothers. The average difference was calculated between d 21 and d 0 (baseline) for treated versus control animals for vitamin A, vitamin E, Se, and Fe. Significance was calculated using a two-tailed student’s t-test where P < 0.10 between d 21 control and treated animals. Control animals had an average vitamin E plasma concentration of 1.168 + 0.355 ppm on d 21, whereas treated animals had an average of 1.547 + 0.559 ppm. Significance was calculated at P = 0.09. Vitamin A, Fe and Se concentrations did not reach significance. Kidney and liver panel checks for animals in each group were not concerning. Future studies should look at modifying first and second sampling timepoints to be closer together. Based on results in calves with a similar study design, shortening the time between treatment and second sampling would give a clearer picture of how the neonatal supplement influenced the nutritional status of the treatment versus control animals.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.101
GPT teacher head0.526
Teacher spread0.425 · 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 ScienceSame topicPediatric health and respiratory diseasesFrench-language works237,207