MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1972812986 · doi:10.5539/jas.v2n3p183

Effect of Kemzyme - Bentonite Co-supplementation on Cecal Fermentation and Metabolic Pattern in Rabbit

2010· article· en· W1972812986 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
M. A. Abdl-Rahman, F. A. R. Sawiress, Sohair Y. Saleh

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agricultural Science · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRabbits: Nutrition, Reproduction, Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFermentationChemistryEnzymeUreaBentoniteFood scienceMetabolismBiochemistryAnimal scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the objective of improving the impact of multi-enzymes feed additives on cecal fermentation pattern and rabbit metabolism, sodium bentonite was co-supplemented with “Kemzyme”, a multi-enzyme blend of Kemin Agrifoods Europe. Co-supplementation decreased cecal pH value, increased total VFAs concentration, increased propionates at the expence of acetates and butyrates, increased fermentation efficieny and VFAs utilization. Additionally, co-supplementation increased serum glucose concentration and decreased serum triglycerides and cholesterol concentration. Cecal ammonia nitrogen and serum urea concentration were also decreased by co-supplementation while no change was recorded in serum total proteins concentration. The study therefore, suggested that, coupling bentonite to multi-enzyme feed additives could improve the impact of such enzymes on cecal fermentation pattern and rabbit metablism.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.269 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations16
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Agricultural ScienceSame topicRabbits: Nutrition, Reproduction, HealthFrench-language works237,207