Sodium bentonite and monensin under chronic aflatoxicosis in broiler chickens
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Clay feed additives have been increasingly incorporated into animal diets to prevent aflatoxicosis. Due to the nonselective nature of the binding interaction, many important components of the diets could also be made unavailable because of these feed additives. The anticoccidial monensin (MON) could also be sequestered by these clays. The use of sodium bentonite (Na-B) from a mine in the province of Mendoza, Argentina, was investigated as a sequestering agent to prevent the effects of 100 µg/kg of dietary aflatoxin B(1) (AFB(1)). In vitro studies demonstrated that the above Na-B was a good candidate to prevent aflatoxicosis. They also showed that MON competes with AFB(1) for the adsorption sites on the clay surface and effectively displaces the toxin when it is in low concentration. Even though the levels of MON in diets, approximately 55 mg/kg, are high enough to not be significantly changed as a consequence of the adsorption, they can further affect the ability of the clays to bind low levels of AFB(1). An in vivo experiment carried out with poultry showed that 100 µg/kg of AFB(1) does not significantly change productive or biochemical parameters. However, liver histopathology not only confirmed the ability of this particular Na-B to prevent aflatoxicosis but also the decrease of this capacity in the presence of 55 mg/kg of MON. This is the first report stressing this fact and further research should be performed to check if this behavior is a characteristic of the assayed Na-B or of this type of clay. On the other hand, the presence of MON should also be taken into account when assaying the potential AFB(1) binding ability of a given bentonite.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".