205 Effects of Timothy grass inclusion in 3-phase-feed and individual Precision fed growing- finishing pigs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Finding sustainable feed ingredients is essential for advancing sustainable pig production. Timothy grass, a perennial forage, shows promise as a nutritious ingredient for growing pigs that may also reduce the environmental impact of pork production. This study evaluated the effects of timothy meal inclusion (TI) on pig growth performance and body composition in two feeding systems (FS): conventional group 3-phase feeding (GPF) and individual precision feeding (IPF). Fifty-six pigs [37.4 ± 0.7 kg of body weight (BW)] from a high-performance genotype were randomly assigned to one of four dietary treatments based on FS and TI (with=1, without=0): GPF0, GPF1, IPF0, and IPF1. In the GPF1 treatment, TI was included at 8%, 16%, and 22% rates for the three growth phases, respectively. In IPF1, timothy was gradually increased based on BW to achieve a similar overall inclusion rate as GPF1. Average daily feed intake (ADFI) was recorded daily, and BW was weekly monitored, with body composition measured via dual X-ray at the beginning and end of each phase. Data was analyzed as repeated measures over time with FS, TI, sex, time, and their interactions as fixed effects and the individual as random effect. No significant three- or four-way interactions were found. ADFI increased over time (P< 0.001) but was not affected by FS or TI, although interactions between sex and time were observed (Sex×Time; P< 0.001). BW was not influenced by FS, but TI reduced final BW by 6% (TI×Time, P = 0.001). Overall, TI reduced ADG by 9% (TI×Time, P = 0.030) while also reducing the Gain:Feed ratio by 10% (TI×Time, P = 0.030). However, independent of TI, IPF pigs had 4% better Gain:Feed, with no changes in ADG and ADFI compared to GPF pigs. Protein deposition varied with TI (TI×Time, P=0.010), which reduced protein deposition in phases 1 and 2, and increased it in phase 3, indicating pigs adapted over time, with no difference between FS. Lipid deposition (LD) was influenced by both FS (P =0.048) and TI over time (TI×Time, P< 0.001), with IPF pigs presenting a 10% lower LD than GPF, whereas TI reduced LD by 22% across FS. Differences in LD could be attributed to differences in digestible and net energy between diets. For body composition, TI reduced final body protein by 2% (TI×Time, P=0.003) while also decreasing final body lipids content by 19% (TI×Time, P< 0.001). Body lipids content in IPF was 8% lower than GPF over time (FS×Time, P< 0.001). TI-fed pigs exhibited lower BW due to a reduction in BL mass and a modest reduction in body protein content, making timothy a potential sustainable feed option. IPF-fed pigs were leaner and had better feed efficiency while maintaining protein deposition and ADG than GPF.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".