Effects of diet formulations containing proteins from different sources on intestinal colonization by Campylobacter jejuni in broiler chickens.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this study was to compare the effects of 3 diet formulations containing different protein sources (animal, plant, and a combination of animal and plant) on the colonization of Campylobacter jejuni in the gastrointestinal tract of broiler chickens. A freshly isolated strain of C. jejuni (biotype IV, serotype HS O:21, O:29, HL untypable) from a broiler chicken was used to infect 3-day-old chicks that had been free of C. jejuni; 0.5 mL of an inoculum containing 10(8) colony-forming units was administered orally. Shedding of the organism was studied, and C. jejuni in the ceca, jejuni, and crop were enumerated by quantitative culture. The isolates recovered from the birds during the study period of 35 d were characterized and confirmed as C. jejuni by the use of standard methods and underwent biotyping, serotyping, antimicrobial susceptibility testing by disk diffusion and the E-test, and flagellin gene typing. A cyclical pattern of shedding of C. jejuni was observed in all the birds. Colonization was highest in the ceca. The ceca of birds receiving plant-protein-based feed had significantly less colonization then the ceca of birds receiving the other types of feed, whereas the differences in colonization of the jejuni and crops were not significant. Characterization by biotyping, serotyping, and flagellin gene typing showed that 95% of the recovered isolates were identical to the strain used for infecting the chicks. However, with the Lior-HL typing scheme, 74% of the recovered isolates were HL untypable. Antimicrobial resistance testing did not reveal significant differences between the infecting strain and the recovered isolates among the different feed groups.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".