The standardized ileal digestible lysine-to-net energy ratio in the diets of lactating primiparous sows to optimize maternal nitrogen retention is dynamic but does not impact piglet performance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fifty-five primiparous sows were recruited to evaluate the effect of increasing standardized ileal digestible (SID) Lys-to-net energy (NE) ratios on primiparous sow maternal nitrogen retention, milk nitrogen output, and piglet growth performance during each week of lactation. Sows were assigned to one of five diets with equally spaced and increasing SID Lys-to-NE ratios between 2.85 and 5.51 g SID Lys/Mcal NE. The intermediate ratios were achieved by blending the two extreme diets in varying proportions using a feeding system with feed blending capabilities and were provided to sows immediately after farrowing and until weaning (day 24 ± 1). Nitrogen (N) balances were conducted between days 4 and 7 (week 1), 12 and 15 (week 2), and 20 and 23 (week 3) with total urine and fecal grab sampling occurring during each N balance period. Linear (LBL) and quadratic broken-line and polynomial quadratic models were used to determine the optimum dietary Lys-to-NE ratios for maternal N retention in each week of lactation. The Bayesian information criterion was used to assess best fit. Dietary feeding program did not influence sow average daily feed intake in lactation, piglet average daily gain and body weight (BW) at weaning, or milk N output during any nitrogen balance period. Sows fed increasing SID Lys-to-NE ratios lost less BW and backfat by the end of lactation (linear; P < 0.05). Sow N intake, N excretion, whole-body N retention (N intake - N excretion in urine and feces), and maternal N retention (whole-body N retention - milk N output) increased as dietary SID Lys-to NE ratio increased within each N balance period (linear; P < 0.05). The LBL model showed the optimal SID Lys-to-NE ratio for maternal N retention was out of the range of the dietary treatments for week one, but maternal N retention was optimized at 4.74 and 4.85 g SID Lys/Mcal NE in weeks two and three, respectively. Therefore, a dynamic SID Lys-to-NE ratio during each week of lactation could be implemented to enhance maternal N retention of primiparous sows.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".