Performance of two strains of laying hens fed ground and whole barley with and without access to insoluble grit
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The live performance from 19 to 43 wk of age of two strains of commercial White Leghorn hens fed two levels of whole barley (0 or 60%) and insoluble grit (0 or 4 g/bird per wk) was compared. The 0 and 60% whole barley diets differed only in feed form and were formulated to the same nutrient specifications. No dilution of nutrients or ingredients occurred. The 0% whole barley diet was fed in mash form. The 60% whole barley diet was fed as whole grain and mash concentrate blended into a complete diet and fed in the same feed trough. Feeding whole barley reduced egg production, feed efficiency, and egg specific gravity and increased feed intake, egg weight, and body weight gain. Access to insoluble grit had no effect on any of the production variables measured. The two strains of hens responded similarly to whole barley but differed in feed intake, feed efficiency, egg weight, egg specific gravity, and body weight gain. Feeding whole barley combined with a mash concentrate depressed hen performance compared to birds fed a similar diet in mash form. Strain of hen and access to insoluble grit did not alter the response to feeding whole barley.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".