MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2039672373 · doi:10.4141/a00-094

Omega-3 enriched eggs: The influence of dietary α-linolenic fatty acid source on egg production and composition

2001· article· en· W2039672373 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ricardo Ayerza, Wayne Coates

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Animal Science · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPolysaccharides Composition and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsYolkFood scienceLinolenic acidFlavorFatty acidComposition (language)Polyunsaturated fatty acidOmega 3 fatty acidChemistryBiologyAnimal scienceDocosahexaenoic acidBiochemistryLinoleic acid

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A study was conducted to assess the effect of replacing chia with flaxseed as a source of α-linolenic acid in laying hen feed. Five diets, identified as T0 through T4, containing 0-0, 7-3, 9-5, 11.5-2.5 and 14-0% whole chia seed and whole flaxseed, respectively, were fed to 240 White Shaver laying hens, at 60 wk of age. No difference (P > 0.05) in egg production, egg weight, yolk weight and albumen weight were found among treatments. Total ω-3 acid percentage was higher (P < 0.05) in the yolks from the hens fed the α-linolenic acid-enriched diets, than in those fed the control diet. Of the three treatments that had any combination of chia and flaxseed comprising 14% of the diet, T2 yielded a lower (P < 0.05) ω-3 content in the yolk, than did T3 and T4. A taste panel found no difference (P > 0.05) in flavor or off-flavor among treatments; however, panel preferences were lower for eggs produced by hens fed the highest level of flaxseed (T2). This study showed no advantages to replacing chia with flaxseed to produce ω-3 enriched eggs. Greater availability of flaxseed, however, might make it more attractive in some markets. Key words: Eggs, chia, flaxseed, omega-3 fatty acid

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations84
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Animal ScienceSame topicPolysaccharides Composition and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207