Evaluating the Efficacy of Enzyme Preparations and Predicting the Performance of Leghorn Chicks Fed Rye-Based Diets with a Dietary Viscosity Assay
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We studied whether a single-step dietary viscosity assay could be used to evaluate the efficacy of an enzyme when added to a poultry diet. The results demonstrated a linear relationship between the log of the dietary viscosity change in vitro, as determined with the new assay and the log of the enzyme activity (xylanase) added to a rye-based diet. The sensitivity of the dietary viscosity assay was high, as little as 0.19 U of xylanase per gram of diet could be detected. In addition, there was a high correlation (r > or = 0.97; P < 0.005) between chick performance and the log of the amount of enzyme added to the diet or the log of its viscosity change in rye-based diets that contained different amounts of xylanase, as determined by the in vitro dietary viscosity assay. Further, the dose response data from the dietary viscosity assay, when incorporated into a log-linear model that we developed, was able to distinguish between the efficacy of two enzymes with regards to their ability to hydrolyze the viscosity factor in rye grain. Therefore, it was possible to accurately evaluate the efficacy of enzyme preparations in a rye diet and to predict chick performance using the new assay in conjunction with a model equation.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 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".