Apparent Nutrient and Mineral Retention of Broilers Fed Periwinkle Flesh (Pachymelania aurita) and Palm Kernel Cake in Replacement to Fish Meal
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fishmeal has contributed immensely as a rich protein source in the diets of poultry in Nigeria. However the cost of fishmeal has increased leading to high cost of poultry feed. This has fueled the search for cheaper alternative protein sources as a way of reducing cost. Two of such alternatives are periwinkle (Pachymelania aurita); a marine molluscs and palm kernel cake a by-product of oil palm. This study investigated the apparent nutrient and mineral retention of broilers fed periwinkle flesh (Pachymelania aurita) and palm kernel cake in place of fishmeal. One hundred and eighty (180) day-old Hyperco broiler chicks were randomly assigned to five dietary treatments 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 with 3 replicates each and 12 chicks per replicate. Periwinkle flesh was fed in place of 2% fishmeal at 0, 2.5 and 6.0% inclusions respectively. Apart from Diet 1, which served as control, all others had in addition to maize 15% or 25% inclusion of palm kernel cake. The birds had access to water ad libitum. At 7 weeks of age, two experimental birds were randomly selected from each replicate and placed in metabolic cages; allowed to acclimatize for two days before metabolic trials. The feeding of 25% Palm Kernel cake (PKC) along with 2% fishmeal or 6% periwinkle flesh resulted in significantly (P<0.05) higher Ca, Mg and K retention when compared to the feeding of 15% PKC or 25% PKC along with a mixture of 1% fishmeal and 2.5% periwinkle flesh. Other minerals P, Mn, Na, and Fe, were not significantly affected. The apparent nutrient retention of broiler chickens was not significantly influenced. Results of the study indicate that feeding 6% periwinkle flesh and 25% is suitable for replacing fishmeal and reducing maize thereby reducing cost of feed.
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".