Relationship Between Bicarbonate Retention and Bone Characteristics in Broiler Chickens
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Determination of the bicarbonate retention factor (BRF) is an important step during development of the indicator amino acid oxidation technique for use in a new model. A series of 4-h oxidation experiments were performed to determine the BRF of broilers aged 7, 14, 21, 28, 35, and 42 d using 4 birds per age group. A priming dose of 1.2 microCi of NaH(14)CO(3), followed by eight half-hourly doses of 1 microCi of NaH(14)CO(3) were given orally to each of 4 birds per age. The percentage of (14)C dose expired by the bird at a steady state was measured. These birds, as well as 12 additional birds matched for age and BW, were killed, and femur bone mineral density was measured by quantitative computed tomography to determine the relationship between bone development and bicarbonate retention at each age. There was a correlation (r = 0.50; P < 0.05) between total cross-sectional femur bone mineral density and bicarbonate retention at each age. A prediction equation (Y = 6.95 x 10(-2)X - 3.51 x 10(-5)X(2) + 27.58; P < 0.0001, R(2) = 0.79) where Y = bicarbonate retention and X = BW was generated to predict Y as a function of X. Bicarbonate retention values peaked at 28 d, during the stage of the most rapid bone deposition and the highest growth rate. A constant BRF was found from 1,900 to 2,700 g of BW of 35.15 +/- 1.095% (mean +/- SEM). This retention factor will allow the accurate correction of oxidation of (14)C-labeled substrates in broilers of different ages and BW in future indicator amino acid oxidation studies.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".