MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2068350156 · doi:10.4141/a01-077

Impact of wet feeding wheat-based diets with or without enzyme on broiler chick performance

2002· article· en· W2068350156 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
T. Scott

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Animal Science · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Nutrition and Physiology
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
FundersAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
KeywordsBroilerBioassayCultivarAnimal scienceBiologyWhole wheatGramFood scienceAgronomyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Two studies were conducted to determine the effect of wheat source on voluntary feed intake when diets were offered in a wet or dry form. The first experiment was designed to establish if a mould inhibitor was necessary. The second experiment allowed more extensive screening of wheat types to determine if there is a genetic component in wheat that explains the differences observed in exp. 1. Experiment 1 was based on two wheat cultivars [Hard Red Spring (HRS) and Durum]. Each wheat was ground, one portion was used as is, the other pelleted and re-ground. The four wheat sources were included at 80% of a standard bioassay diet (with enzyme) and each diet was fed with or without propionic acid. The eight diets were fed ad libitum as is or with 1.2 g water per gram of feed. The wet diets were prepared daily and all diets were fed to four groups of six male broilers from 1 to 17 d of age. The second experiment utilized three cultivars each of HRS and Durum wheat fed in similar bioassay diets with no pre-pelleting or added mould inhibitor; each diet was fed with or without enzyme. Each of the 12 diets in the second experiment was fed with and without 1.2 g water per gram of feed to six groups of eight male broilers from 1 to 21 d of age. For both experiments, the daily intake of feed, on an air-dried basis, was detennined for each diet and used to calculate feed conversion for the respective feeding periods. Experiment 1 showed no effect of supplementing the wheat-based diets with propionic acid. This same experiment also clearly showed that feed intake was increased with wet feeding and there were significantly greater effects when HRS as compared to Durum wheat was fed. Experiment 2 clearly established that there are distinct differences in voluntary feed intake with wet feeding utilizing HRS as compared to Durum wheat. This experiment indicated that wet feeding mimics enzyme supplementation with regard to lowering digesta viscosity, but it is clearly unique from enzyme supplementation with its large effect on feed intake and growth. These studies support our hypothesis that variability in hydration rate of cereal-based diets may limit intake. Key words: Wheat, wet feeding, enzymes, feed intake, broilers

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.870
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.040
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.204 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations41
Published2002
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Animal ScienceSame topicAnimal Nutrition and PhysiologyFrench-language works237,207