Growth and Economic Performance of Broiler Chickens Fed on Graded Levels of Canola Meal with or without Multi-Enzyme Supplementation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Canola meal (CM) is commonly used in poultry diets; however, its use is limited due to anti-nutritive factors. Therefore, this study was conducted to evaluate the effects of feeding various levels of canola meal (CM) with or without multi-enzyme supplement on broiler chickens. Four levels of CM (0, 5, 10 and 20%) were used with or without multi-enzyme (0 or 300 g/ton of diet) in a factorial design 4 × 2 in 8 dietary combinations. During the experimental period (0-42 d of age), inclusion of CM at a level of 5 and 10% without multi-enzyme and at a level of 20% with or without multi-enzyme decreased body weight gain and gain:feed ratio compared to control (CON; P < 0.05). However, there was no difference in the final body weight at day 42 of age between the groups. No differences were found in carcass characteristics between treatments. Inclusion of CM in broiler diet decreased serum antibody titer at 42 d of age compared to the control and enzyme-supplemented CM groups (P < 0.05). Inclusion of CM with multi-enzyme supplement decreased serum total cholesterol, total triglyceride and glutamate oxaloacetate transaminase compared to CON and enzyme-unsupplemented groups (P < 0.05). Diets supplemented with CM had higher serum creatinine than CON and enzyme-supplemented CM groups (P < 0.05). Lower serum triiodothyronine in broilers fed diet supplemented with 10 or 20% CM was noticed (P < 0.05). CM with multi-enzyme supplementation to broiler ration showed a slight increase in net revenue.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".