Growth performance, meat quality, and gut microflora of broiler chickens fed with cranberry extract
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cranberry fruit components have been reported to have antimicrobial activities against a variety of pathogenic bacteria and to be beneficial for human health. Studies on their effects are very limited in animals and especially in chickens. This study investigated the effect of feed supplementation with a commercial cranberry fruit extract (CFE) on the performance, breast meat quality, and intestinal integrity of broiler chickens. Twelve hundred male 1-d-old broiler chicks were allocated randomly to CFE treatments at 0, 40, 80, or 160 mg/kg of feed from d 0 to 35. Cloacal and cecal samples were collected weekly to evaluate the influence of treatments on the intestinal population of generic Escherichia coli, Clostridium perfringens, Enterococcus spp., and Lactobacillus spp. At d 35, BW were 1.62, 1.60, 1.61, and 1.64 kg for the control birds and birds fed 40, 80, and 160 mg of CFE/kg of feed, respectively. Feed intake ranged from 2.7 to 2.8 kg and feed efficiency from 1.8 to 1.9 g of feed/g of BW. However, the treatment effects on bird performance were not statistically significant (P > 0.05). The mortality rate tended to be lower (P = 0.09) in birds fed 40 mg of CFE/kg of feed. Feed supplementation with CFE did not significantly alter any broiler meat properties evaluated when compared with the control diet (P > 0.05). At d 28, the populations of Enterococcus spp. in cecal and cloacal samples were significantly lower (P < 0.05) in birds receiving CFE at 160 mg/kg of feed than the other groups. No significant differences were noted between the control and the treatment groups for general health and intestinal integrity (P > 0.05). These findings suggest that more studies are needed to investigate potential beneficial effects of CFE or its derivatives in broiler production.
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".