Development of the indicator amino acid oxidation technique in chickens: calibration of oxidation system and determination of bicarbonate retention factor
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The indicator amino acid oxidation technique has been widely used as a rapid and sensitive method to determine amino acid requirement. In this technique, the indicator 14C-amino acid is continuously infused and breath 14CO2 is collected to determine oxidation rate, which is used to predict requirement. However, a portion of the 14CO2 produced from amino acid oxidation is retained in the body and must be determined to correct oxidation rates based on breath 14CO2 collection. To develop the indicator amino acid oxidation technique for use in poultry, it is important to accurately measure expired and retained CO2; these measurements were accomplished using intravenous infusion of NaH14CO3. Oxidation chambers were constructed and calibrated to ensure complete collection of breath 14CO2. Hydrochloric acid was infused over 1 h into a beaker containing NaH14CO3 in four closed oxidation chambers, and the 14CO2 released was collected over 2 h. Of the initial radioactivity dose, 99.3 +/- 1.9% was recovered in collected 14CO2. We concluded that the oxidation chamber apparatus is adequate for complete recovery of expired 14CO2. In Experiment 2, we determined bicarbonate retention in five broiler breeder roosters from a primed, constant infusion of NaH14CO3 into the jugular vein for 4 h. At steady state, 86.0 +/- 1.4% of NaH14CO3 infusion was recovered in breath. Because 14% of infused 14C is retained within the body, the present results demonstrate the need to determine bicarbonate retention in chickens during oxidation studies and use it as a correction factor in subsequent experiments.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".