MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2093315187 · doi:10.1093/ps/82.1.147

Performance of two strains of laying hens fed ground and whole barley with and without access to insoluble grit

2003· article· en· W2093315187 on OpenAlexaff
CD Bennett, HL Classen

Bibliographic record

VenuePoultry Science · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Nutrition and Physiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyWhole wheatNutrientWhole grainsAnimal scienceFeed conversion ratioBody weightLayingFood scienceWeight gainGritAgronomyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.415
Threshold uncertainty score0.149

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.238 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations22
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePoultry ScienceSame topicAnimal Nutrition and PhysiologyFrench-language works237,207