MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410539140 · doi:10.1093/jas/skaf102.124

99 Growth performance of grow-finish pigs fed different levels of soybean meal in non-isocaloric diets with provisions of digestible amino acids above estimated requirements

2025· article· en· W4410539140 on OpenAlexaff
Molly L McGhee, Qingyun Li, Chad M Pilcher, Wesley Schweer

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Animal Science · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Nutrition and Physiology
Canadian institutionsCargill (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMealSoybean mealFood scienceAnimal scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract An experiment was conducted to determine the performance of grow-finish pigs fed 1 of 4 diets with graded levels of soybean meal (SBM) formulated to investigate two potential confounding factors in evaluating increased dietary inclusion of SBM. First, diets were not formulated to be isocaloric; therefore, lower G:F was expected with reduced dietary net energy in high SBM diets. Secondly, diets were formulated to partially ameliorate the potential confounding effect of greater digestible amino acids (AA) in high SBM diets. The SBM levels were defined for the low treatment by least-cost formulation with no restrictions on crystalline AA (L-Lys, DL-Met, L-Thr, L-Trp, L-Val, and L-Ile). The high SBM diets within each phase were formulated to meet standardized ileal digestible (SID) AA requirements with no crystalline L-Lys. The SBM levels in the 2 intermediate treatments were equally spaced between the high and low treatments. After defining the SBM levels for each diet, crystalline AA were added to the lower SBM diets to be closer to or match the SID Thr, Trp, Ile, and Val present in the highest SBM treatment. A total of 1,042 pigs [28.7 ± 0.3 kg; mixed sex; PIC 337] were allotted to 12 replicate pens per treatment (21 – 22 pigs per pen) and randomly allotted within location block to treatment. A 6-phase feeding program was managed according to pre-determined feed budgets, and pigs were weighed by pen approximately every other week. Data were analyzed using the lme4 package of R 4.1.2, and the model included the fixed effect of treatment and the random effect of block. Linear and quadratic contrast statements were used to test the effects of increasing SBM in diets. Data are presented in combined weigh periods (Table 1). Average body weight was not different at any time point, including final body weight. In period 1 (day 0-30), no differences in average daily gain (ADG) or average daily feed intake (ADFI) were detected; however, feed efficiency (G:F) was improved (linear, P < 0.05) with greater inclusion of SBM. In period 2 (day 30-63), ADG and G:F increased (quadratic, P < 0.05) with greater inclusion of SBM. In period 3 (day 63-99), G:F was reduced (quadratic, P < 0.05), driven by increased ADFI (linear, P < 0.05). With opposing performance responses observed between early and later periods, no differences in performance were detected overall. In conclusion, greater SBM in non-isocaloric diets improved G:F in early growth periods, but not in late finishing. The improved G:F observed in the first two periods was contrary to the hypothesis and could be due to greater net energy in SBM than expected, greater provisions of AA beyond Lys, Met, Thr, Trp, Val, and Ile, or something else.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 designBench or experimental
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Animal ScienceSame topicAnimal Nutrition and PhysiologyFrench-language works237,207