Variation in Nutritional Value of Sorghum Hybrids with Contrasting Seed Weight Characteristics and Comparisons with Maize in Broiler Chicks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sorghum [Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench] hybrids with high seed weight often have higher protein and fat contents. Experiments were conducted to compare the feeding value of grain sorghum hybrids contrasting in seed weight and composition with conventional hybrid maize (Zea mays L.). Feeding assays were conducted using broiler chicks to determine the metabolizable energy (ME) content of the various cereal grains. Eight sorghum hybrids were produced from crosses of two seed parents with two normal‐seeded and two large‐seeded male parent lines. The seed parent lines were ASA3042 and AWheatland. The normal‐seeded male parents were RTx2737 and RTx435, and the large‐seeded parents were KS115 and Eastin‐1. The eight sorghum hybrids and a hybrid maize check were produced under dryland conditions at Manhattan and Ottawa, KS, in 2000 and at Manhattan and Belleville, KS, in 2001. Feeding trials were conducted in the spring of 2001 and 2002. Each trial consisted of a reference diet and the hybrid maize and sorghum entries with six pens per treatment. A combined analysis across environments indicated that hybrid maize had an ME value of 3.51 Mcal kg−1 and the large‐seeded male parent, KS115, produced hybrids with ME values that averaged 3.48 Mcal kg−1 Normal‐seeded hybrids averaged 3.36 Mcal kg−1 These studies indicate that use of KS115 as a means of increasing seed weight and fat content of grain sorghum may also contribute to increased nutritional value of the grain.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".