Effect of protein source and enzyme supplementation on ileal protein digestibility and fattening performance in rabbits
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An experiment was conducted to determine the effects of source of protein (soybean vs sunflower meal) and enzyme supplementation (no enzyme vs protease addition vs protease + xylanase addition) on digestion and growth traits of rabbits. Treatments were arranged factorially in six isonutritive diets. Two hundred and forty rabbits weaned at 25 or 35 days were used to measure dry matter and crude protein apparent ileal digestibility of diets at 35 or 45 days of age, respectively. Another one hundred and eighty animals weaned at 35 days were fed ad libitum in individual cages during four weeks to determine fattening performance. Source of protein did not affect digestion efficiency or feed conversion rate in the whole fattening period, but animals fed soybean meal-based diets showed higher feed intake, grew faster and had higher mortality than those fed sunflower meal-based diets. Addition of enzymes increased ileal apparent digestibility, especially in youngest animals when supplements contained xylanase besides protease activity. Enzyme supplementation did not affect any of the growth traits studied, but decreased fattening mortality in sunflower meal-based diets.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 it