MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Can We Prevent Boar Taint and Reduce the Need to Castrate Male Pigs?

2025· article· en· W4408836631 on OpenAlexaff
E. James Squires, Christine Bone

Bibliographic record

VenueAnimal Science Cases · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicAnimal Behavior and Welfare Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBoar taintBOARMedicineAndrologyAnimal scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Castration of male piglets to prevent boar taint was traditionally done without pain relief. Current codes of practise require the use of analgesics, but castration still results in some pain and stress, increased chance of infections and decreased production efficiency, so alternatives to castration for controlling boar taint are needed. Boar taint is caused by androstenone, a sex pheromone produced by the testis, and skatole, which is produced from the degradation of tryptophan by the gut microbiota. Boar taint is a multifactorial issue that is influenced by numerous physiological processes that vary between different breeds and individuals, with some pigs exhibiting naturally low levels of boar taint. This case study evaluates strategies to identify those individuals with a low potential for boar taint, which would allow them to be used in pork production without further treatment. Levels of plasma androstenone at 21 and 28 days of age were the most reliable predictors of boar taint at maturity. For pigs with a high potential for boar taint, strategies to control boar taint without castration that do not result in decreased production efficiency are needed. This includes immunocastration and genetic selection; nutritional strategies using prebiotics and dietary binding agents are also possible. Information © The Authors 2025

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.927
Threshold uncertainty score0.703

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.367
Teacher spread0.302 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnimal Science CasesSame topicAnimal Behavior and Welfare StudiesFrench-language works237,207