MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402541057 · doi:10.1093/jas/skae234.207

317 Microbial interventions to improve gut health in neonatal ruminants

2024· article· en· W4402541057 on OpenAlexaff
Nilusha Malmuthuge, Le Luo Guan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Animal Science · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicAnimal health and immunology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychological interventionGut microfloraBiologyAnimal healthMedicineBacteriaNursingAnimal scienceGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Colonization and establishment of a balanced and healthy gut microbiome during the neonatal period can directly and indirectly influence animals by affecting the development and metabolism, nutrition absorption, barrier and immune functions, and endocrine and neuron transmitter secretions. Therefore, neonatal period represents a crucial window of time in animal’s life that induces long-term developmental and immune memory. Therefore, alterations in the early gut microbial composition and colonization trajectories lead to long-term negative effects on animals’ production and health. While the rapidly developing gut microbial community is affected by various external factors due to its instability, it provides a great opportunity for microbial intervention to alter microbial colonization trajectories and their subsequent impact on gut health. Recent advance research has been successful in restoring altered gut microbial communities by using microbial interventions such as vaginal seeding, fecal microbial transplantation, probiotics, and prebiotics. However, there is a lack of understanding on the long-term effects of these interventions on gut health in neonatal ruminants. Direct fed microbes (live naturally existing microbes that can improve health and production performance) with psychobiotic function (a type of probiotic that affect cognitive and behavioral functions of the host via the gut-brain axis) can be one of the novel microbiome solutions to target and alter the microbiome dysbiosis. The use of direct fed microbes, postbiotics and psychobiotics and their potential implications in improving calf health and productivity leads to a novel solution to the manipulation of the gut microbiome in calves.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

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 integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.428
Teacher spread0.362 · 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 topicAnimal health and immunologyFrench-language works237,207