ArticleJournal of animal science2024
Modeling energy partition patterns of growing pigs fed diets with different net energy levels based on machine learning.
Article in Journal of animal science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Standardized ileal digestible linoleic acid requirement of modern lactating sows: A dose-response study.Animal nutrition (Zhongguo xu mu shou yi xue hui) · 2026Article
- Big Data and AI-Powered Modeling: A Pathway to Sustainable Precision Animal Nutrition.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The objectives of this study were to evaluate the energy partition patterns of growing pigs fed diets with different net energy (NE) levels based on machine learning methods, and to develop prediction models for the NE requirement of growing pigs. Twenty-four Duroc × Landrace × Yorkshire crossbred barrows with an initial body weight of 24.90 ± 0.46 kg were randomly assigned to 3 dietary treatments, including the low NE group (2,325 kcal/kg), the medium NE group (2,475 kcal/kg), and the high NE group (2,625 kcal/kg). The total feces and urine produced from each pig during each period were collected, to calculate the NE intake, NE retained as protein (NEp), and NE retained as lipid (NEl). A total of 240 sets of data on the energy partition patterns of each pig were collected, 75% of the data in the dataset was randomly selected as the training dataset, and the remaining 25% was set as the testing dataset. Prediction models for the NE requirement of growing pigs were developed using algorithms including multiple linear regression (MR), artificial neural networks (ANN), k-nearest neighbor (KNN), and random forest (RF), and the prediction performance of these models was compared on the testing dataset. The results showed pigs in the low NE group showed a lower average daily gain, lower average daily feed intake, lower NE intake, but greater feed conversion ratio compared to pigs in the high NE group in most growth stages. In addition, pigs in the 3 treatment groups did not show a significant difference in NEp in all growth stages, while pigs in the medium and high NE groups showed greater NEl compared to pig in the low NE group in growth stages from 25 to 55 kg (P < 0.05). Among the developed prediction models for NE intake, NEp, and NEl, the ANN models demonstrated the most optimal prediction performance with the smallest root mean square error (RMSE) and the largest R2, while the RF models had the worst prediction performance with the largest RMSE and the smallest R2. In conclusion, diets with varied NE concentrations within a certain range did not affect the NEp of growing pigs, and the models developed with the ANN algorithm could accurately achieve the NE requirement prediction in growing pigs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.