Riboflavin content in lupine seeds and blood plasma riboflavin status in broilers fed diets containing high levels of lupine seeds
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract BACKGROUND: The potential of lupine as a source of protein and other nutrients in poultry has attracted considerable attention in countries dependent on imports of soybean meal (SBM), as well as in organic farming. Nutritional aspects of riboflavin in lupines are poorly understood. This work evaluated riboflavin content in whole and dehulled seeds of three lupines (L. albus, L. angustifolius, L. luteus) and riboflavin status in broiler fed diets containing high levels of lupine seeds in comparison to SBM. RESULTS: Riboflavin is concentrated mainly in lupine cotyledons, predominantly as flavin mononucleotide. Its content in whole seeds ranged from 2.07 to 2.70 mg kg−1, and was comparable to content in SBM (2.35 mg kg−1). In comparison to the SBM‐fed group, broilers fed lupine diets showed higher plasma riboflavin (P < 0.05), but their growth rate and feed intake parameters were significantly lower (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Lupine seeds contain moderate to high levels of riboflavin. Feeding diets containing high levels of lupine seeds did not have adverse effects on plasma riboflavin status in broilers. Poor performance of broilers fed lupine diets is not associated with inadequacy of riboflavin. Copyright © 2008 Society of Chemical Industry
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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".