Effects of fibre content in pelleted wheat and oats diets on technical pellet quality and nutritional value for broiler chickens
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Two experiments were conducted to study the effects of either soluble or insoluble fibre naturally occurring in wheat and oats, on technical pellet quality and nutritional value for broiler chickens. In exp. 1, the effects of insoluble fibre were studied by mixing diets based on wheat or naked oats with either coarse or fine oats hulls followed by pelleting. Hull inclusion increased (P < 0.05) starch gelatinisation, especially in the diets based on oats. Addition of finely ground oats hulls improved pellet durability, in particular after storage, while no such effect was observed for coarse oats hulls. Oats hulls inclusion caused a more elastic pellet with higher breaking resistance (P < 0.05). Lower (P < 0.05) energy consumption was observed for diets based on oats compared with wheat, while no effect of fibre inclusion on energy consumption was found. In exp. 2, the influence of pelleting on the viscosity effect of soluble fibres in diets based on wheat or oats was studied. A significant increase (P < 0.05) in intestinal viscosity of broiler chickens was observed for all batches of grain exposed to steam pelleting. Viscosity was doubled (P < 0.05) with wheat diets, while the increase in viscosity was even greater in oat diets. In wheat diets, feed intake and weight gain was reduced (P < 0.05), while feed conversion ratio was not affected. Steam pelleting of oats reduced (P < 0.05) feed intake and weight gain, and increased feed conversion ratio (P < 0.05). The improvements (P < 0.05) in metabolisable energy and dry matter digestibility in wheat diets was not consistent with the observed increases in viscosity or with the results obtained with oats. Key words: Soluble fibres, insoluble fibres, viscosity, starch gelatinisation, steam-pelleting
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".