However, some of the reasoning behind the results still seems like guesswork. Although much of the research is backed up by previous experiments, many of the results are merely guessed at being the reason for a reaction. Speculating that starvation could be a probable cause for the lower peptidase activity is just one of the many results that are finalized with a guess as a probable cause. Although the information appears to be valid, the authors of the research present their work with assumptions, which gives some doubt to the end results of the experiment. This sense of doubt, along with the repetition of results from previous studies, leaves the experiment with a sense of waste. Perhaps the importance of this information could help farmers understand the development of their piglets; however, since the changes in the intestines did not affect the piglets in any way of becoming ill, there seemed little purpose in the study of the intestinal morphology.

Some of the material in the introduction and summary were a bit repetitive, while other areas could leave the reader a bit confused, leaving out some information on particular days of the experiment and leaving the reader to make assumptions as to which pigs were slaughtered in the beginning of the experiment.
Although the study helped confirm previous studies on the effects of weaning on small intestinal morphology, the results were only described as possible reasons for the conclusion. With the insinuation of uncertainty, the experiment's results give an impression of being inconclusive.

Works Cited

Hedemann, M.S., S. Hojsgaard, and B.B. Jensen. "Small Intestinal Morphology and Activity of Intestinal Peptidases in Piglets around Weaning." Blackwell.de/synergy.com. 4 Sept