MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414831421 · doi:10.1093/jas/skaf300.145

80 Biochar as a broadly applicable dietary treatment for the prevention of boar taint.

2025· article· en· W4414831421 on OpenAlexaffabout
Melissa Parent, Christine Bone, E. James Squires

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Animal Science · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMeat and Animal Product Quality
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAndrostenoneBoar taintSkatoleBOARLarge whiteMaturity (psychological)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Boar taint is a meat quality issue of off-odour and flavour in heated pork products from intact male pigs, due to the accumulation of androstenone and skatole in the fat. There are many physiological pathways that contribute to boar taint development, depending on the age, genetics and environment of the animal. Maturity status may also influence boar taint development and is assessed through plasma estrone sulfate (E1S) levels. Our previous work showed that a 5% inclusion of biochar in the diet will prevent boar taint in a subset of slaughter weight boars, but it is unclear if this treatment is broadly applicable across genetic lines. Therefore, the objective was to compare the success of biochar treatment in two genetic lines of boars and assess if treatment response relates to maturity status. This was done using (n=17) Alliance Genetics Canada (AGC) boars and (n=52) Pig Improvement Company (PIC) boars, all of which were 3-way [(Yorkshire x Landrace) x Duroc] cross boars at a starting weight of 73.20 ± 1.19 kg. All animals were fed a 5% biochar diet for a 4-week treatment period, followed by a 2-week recovery period on a standard finisher diet. Plasma samples were collected weekly to assess maturity status through an E1S radioimmunoassay. Backfat biopsies were performed bi-weekly and used to quantify fat androstenone using an androstenone-specific enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Repeated-measures 2-way ANOVAs were performed using SAS to evaluate changes in androstenone levels and maturity status over the trial and to compare results between the two genetic lines. We identified three distinct boar taint phenotypes, low boar taint animals that do not require treatment, high boar taint boars that respond positively to treatment, and high boar taint boars that do not respond to treatment. 47% of AGC boars had low boar taint, compared to 71% in the PIC line. In high boar taint animals treated with biochar, 90% of AGC boars and 67% of PIC boars responded to treatment. In positive responders, the concentration of fat androstenone was similar between both genetic lines at all time points during the trial (p >0.05). Maturity status within the three boar taint phenotypes was examined in both genetic lines (Figure 1). Early maturing boars were identified in all three boar taint phenotypes, while late maturing boars either had low boar taint or responded positively to biochar treatment. These findings suggest that biochar treatment is a broadly applicable treatment for boar taint, as it is similarly effective in two genetic lines. Additionally, the response to biochar treatment is affected by maturity status, which may help to identify animals that respond favourably to biochar treatment and allow for the administration of biochar treatment in a targeted manner.

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)0.000
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 score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Animal ScienceSame topicMeat and Animal Product QualityFrench-language works237,207