Effect of Precision Feeding SID Lysine and Amino Acids to Lactating Sows Compared to a Conventional Feeding Strategy on Sow and Litter Performance and Feed Cost in a Commercial Farm
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A total of 728 gilts and parity 1 sows (Camborough, PIC, Hendersonville, TN) and litters (Camborough × PIC 800) were used in a 19-day lactation study to evaluate the effects of precision feeding Lys and other amino acids compared to providing a single lactation diet at a commercial sow farm. Sows were blocked by parity and allotted to one of two treatments at entry into the farrowing rooms. Treatments consisted of a single 1.07% SID Lys lactation diet or a blend of a high and low SID Lys diet to provide a specific targeted SID Lys intake for each day of lactation. Two diets were used to create the blended dietary treatment, a low Lys diet (0.60% SID Lys) or a high Lys diet (1.07% SID Lys). Sows fed the control diet treatment were fed only the high Lys diet. Sows on the blended diet treatment were fed a blend of the low and high Lys diet to target a specific Lys intake for each day of lactation using the Gestal Quattro Opti feeder (Jyga Technologies, St-Lambert-de-Lauzon, Quebec, Canada). Lysine intake targets were based on the NRC (2012) model estimates for gilts and sows with 17 piglets, with the exception that levels were increased by 20% to reach a targeted average Lys intake of approximately 63 g/d. Average Lys intake was 87% of target because sow feed intake during lactation was lower than predicted. As expected, sows fed the control diet treatment had greater (P < 0.001; 72.0 vs. 54.8 g/d) Lys intake compared to sows fed the blended diet treatment because they were fed only the high Lys diet. No differences (P > 0.05) in entry-to-wean change in sow BW, backfat or loin depth, caliper score, or ADFI were observed between treatments. There were no differences (P > 0.05) in litter size at d 2 after equalization or weaning between treatments; however, litters and piglets from sows fed the control treatment tended to have a greater weaning weight (P = 0.075) and ADG (P = 0.090) compared to litters and piglets from sows fed the blended diet treatment. This is likely due to low Lys intake for sows fed the blend diet treatment to maximize litter growth performance. Feed cost per sow was lower (P < 0.05) for sows fed the blend curve in both a low and high ingredient price scenario. No differences (P > 0.05) in feed
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".