Dietary amino acids affect intestinal <i>Clostridium perfringens</i> populations in broiler chickens
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An experiment was performed to examine the effect of protein source and dietary amino acid profile on intestinal levels of C. perfringens in broiler chickens. Broiler chickens (age = 14 d; n = 192) were fed diets containing 400 g kg-1 crude protein with fish meal, meat/bone meal, feather meal, corn gluten meal, soy protein concentrate, pea protein concentrate, or potato protein concentrate as the primary protein source along with a control diet containing 230 g kg-1 crude protein. The birds were orally inoculated daily, with 1 mL (~1.0 × 108 CFU mL-1) of an overnight culture of C. perfringens between 14 and 21 d of age, killed at 28 d of age and C. perfringens numbers in ileum and cecum were enumerated. Birds fed fish meal, meat/bone meal, feather meal and potato protein concentrate had significantly higher intestinal C. perfringens counts than the birds fed corn gluten meal, soy or pea protein concentrates or the control diet (P < 0.05). The glycine content of the diets and ileal contents was significantly, positively correlated with C. perfringens numbers in ileum and cecum. Dietary glycine may be an important factor in the intestinal overgrowth of C. perfringens in broiler chickens. Key words: Clostridium perfringens, broiler chicken, amino acid, glycine, necrotic enteritis
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".