An Alternative to Antibiotic-Based Drugs in Feed for Enhancing Performance of Broilers Grown on Eimeria Spp.-Infected Litter
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Three trials were conducted to evaluate the effects of lasalocid, an anticoccidial feed additive (90.7 kg/ton); bacitracin, a growth-promoter (50 g/ton); and yeast culture residue (YCR) (1 kg/ton) on the performance of broiler chicks reared to 42 d of age on recycled litter. Recycled litter consisted of pine wood shavings containing droppings from chicks infected with 3 select strains of coccidia (Eimeria tenella, Eimeria maxima, and Eimeria acervulina). Response variables (BW, intestinal tract and litter coliform counts, cecal and liver relative weights, and litter moisture content) were recorded biweekly. Mean BW of chicks fed the diet supplemented with YCR was higher than that of the controls (P < 0.05) and comparable to that of the lasalocid-treated birds in all 3 trials. Mean BW of chicks in all treatment groups decreased uniformly as the litter aged and moisture content increased. The mean intestinal coliform population from YCR-treated chicks was lower (P < 0.05) than those of the control and lasalocid populations. The coliform count was consistently lower than that in chicks on a bacitracin-supplemented diet. Coliform counts from the control and lasalocid-treated birds did not differ. The litter coliform counts increased with increased use of the litter. Cecal and liver relative weights calculated from the chicks in trial 3 showed that only the liver was significantly affected by treatments. YCR appeared to be a viable alternative to bacitracin and lasalocid medication in enhancing growth of broiler chicks reared on recycled litter.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".