Pig fecal microbiota during early stages of production and associations with sow microbiota, genotype, and growth performance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this thesis was to investigate interplays between piglet fecal, sow fecal/vaginal microbiota, pig genetics, and growth performance. The fecal microbiota was analyzed from samples collected from 360 piglets reared under raised without antibiotics or conventional systems at four timepoints from birth to post-weaning from nine farrowing sources in Ontario and Quebec. Additionally, the microbiota of fecal and vaginal samples collected from sows were analyzed. Piglets were genotyped for a panel of ~63 000 single nucleotide variants, and their growth performance during pre-weaning and growing stage was measured. Three successive clusters of microbiota were identified across piglet early life. Further, sow microbes accounted for ~30 % of microbes found in piglet fecal microbiota. Lastly, genome-wide association studies identified associations between pig genotype and microbiota diversity, and interactions between microbiota and genotype on pig performance. These findings may improve swine performance by broadly characterizing piglet microbiota.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".