MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413844311 · doi:10.1093/jas/skaf305

Standardized ileal amino acid digestibility estimates are not additive in extruded canine diets with an increasing inclusion of whole pulse flour ingredients

2025· article· en· W4413844311 on OpenAlexaff
Sydney Banton, James R Templeman, Patrícia M Oba, Kelly S. Swanson, Jennifer Saunders-Blades, Anna K. Shoveller

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Animal Science · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicClinical Nutrition and Gastroenterology
Canadian institutionsPetro-CanadaUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFood scienceInclusion (mineral)ChemistryMineralogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The pet food industry currently formulates using crude protein (CP) and gross amino acid (AA) concentrations of individual ingredients as opposed to formulating on an AA standardized ileal digestibility (SID) basis, like in swine and poultry diets. In order to formulate on a SID basis, AA digestibility of individual ingredients must be additive when combined in a complete diet, but this assumption has not been evaluated in pet food. The objective of the present study was to determine if there is AA additivity in 4 extruded experimental diets using the AA SID estimates from the individual ingredients that were either taken from literature or determined using the cecectomized rooster. One diet contained 45% corn and corn gluten meal (Corn45), and the other 3 had increasing inclusions of whole pulse flours, up to 45% (Pulse15, Pulse30, Pulse45), all with chicken as the main protein source. To determine the AA digestibility, 28 cecectomized roosters (4 roosters per test substrate evaluated) were randomly assigned to the 4 test diets or ingredients (chicken meal, whole pinto bean flour, and whole chickpea flour). Endogenous corrections for AAs were made using 5 additional cecectomized roosters that had been fasted for 48 h. In order to determine AA SID additivity, the difference between measured and predicted SID was determined. Differences were tested for difference from zero using a one-sample 2-tailed t-test by the TTEST procedure of SAS (version 9.4). AA SID data in the complete diets were analyzed using the Mixed Models procedure of SAS. Of the AAs that were different among diets, the majority had greater SID estimates in Corn45 compared to the 3 pulse diets (P < 0.05). Only 5 AAs (tryptophan, alanine, cysteine, glutamic acid, glycine) were not different from zero when predicted SID was subtracted from measured SID in Corn45, one AA (tryptophan) in Pulse15, 2 AAs (histidine, glycine) in Pulse30, and 1 AA (glycine) in Pulse45 (P > 0.05). The results from this study suggest that the SID of ingredients is not additive when extruded in a complete diet intended for dogs. This highlights the need for a greater understanding of ingredient interactions in the food matrix during extrusion.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.317 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Animal ScienceSame topicClinical Nutrition and GastroenterologyFrench-language works237,207