Vitamin nutrition of livestock animals: Overview from vitamin discovery to today
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The term “vitamin” or “vitamine” was first used in 1912. What later became known as vitamin deficiency diseases — scurvy, beriberi, night blindness and xeropthalmia — had plagued the world from antiquity. From 1900 through the 1930s, experiments with animals helped to advance knowledge of vitamins considerably. There are 15 vitamins of significance for livestock. A number of factors influence vitamin requirements and vitamin utilization, including physiological make-up and production function; confinement rearing without pasture; stress, disease and adverse environmental conditions; vitamin antagonists; use of antimicrobial drugs; and body vitamin reserves. Under commercial livestock and poultry production conditions, vitamin allowances higher than National Research Council (USA) requirements may be needed for optimum performance. Generally, the optimum vitamin supplementation level is the quantity that achieves the best growth rate, feed utilization and health (including immune competency), while also providing adequate body reserves. Key words: Vitamins, history, deficiency, requirements, supplementation
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 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 it