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 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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".