MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1967611637 · doi:10.3382/ps.2007-00489

Effects of Galacto-Oligosaccharides and a Bifidobacteria lactis-Based Probiotic Strain on the Growth Performance and Fecal Microflora of Broiler Chickens

2008· article· en· W1967611637 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePoultry Science · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Nutrition and Physiology
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBroilerProbioticPrebioticBiologyBifidobacteriumFood sciencePopulationBifidobacterium longumFecesLactobacillusFeed additiveFeed conversion ratioLactoseAnimal scienceMicrobiologyBacteriaFermentationBody weight

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A galacto-oligosaccharide (GOS) prebiotic was prepared by reacting a high concentration of lactose (40% wt/vol) with a beta-galactosidase enzyme for 24 h at 37 degrees C. The enzyme was produced from recombinant Pichia pastoris X-33 cells. The study aimed at evaluating the effects of the prebiotic, a Bifidobacterium lactis-based probiotic, and the combination of these dietary additives on BW, feed intake, feed conversion ratio, and fecal counts of total anaerobic bacteria, lactobacilli, and bifidobacteria in broiler chickens. No significant differences in BW, feed intake and feed conversion ratio were found among the various groups. The study showed that GOS selectively stimulated the fecal microflora of broiler chickens. Total anaerobic bacteria and lactobacilli were increased by 3.4- and 3.56-fold, respectively, in chickens fed the diet containing GOS (3 kg per 25 kg) and B. lactis for 40 d compared with those fed the control diet. The bifidobacteria population in chickens fed the diet containing GOS (3 kg per 25 kg) and B. lactis significantly increased 21-fold in comparison to the control-fed birds. In particular, increasing the dietary concentration of GOS was accompanied by significant increases (P < 0.05) in bifidobacteria counts. The detectable population of bifidobacteria was also greater (P < 0.05) in chickens fed the diet containing GOS and bifidobacteria when compared with chickens fed a bifidobacteria-containing ration only. These results suggest that using GOS in combination with a B. lactis-based probiotic favored intestinal growth of bifidobacteria in broiler chickens.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.735
Threshold uncertainty score0.394

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.183
Teacher spread0.170 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it