Performance, egg quality, and blood plasma chemistry of laying hens fed hempseed and hempseed oil
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study was to compare the performance of hens (feed intake, rate of lay, egg weight, and BW gain), egg quality and blood biochemistry (enzymes, electrolytes, proteins, and other plasma constituents) of laying hens fed diets containing hemp products. Forty-eight Lohmann LSL-Classic (white-egg layers; 19 wk of age) were individually caged and fed 1 of 6 wheat-barley-soybean-based diets for a period of 12 wk. The diets consisted of hempseed (HS; 10, 20, or 30%), hempseed oil (HO; 4.5 or 9.0%), or a control diet (corn oil-based). All diets were formulated to contain similar levels of crude fat (11%), energy (2,800 kcal/kg), and CP (17%). Data were analyzed as a completely randomized design using the repeated measure analysis of the PROC MIXED procedure of SAS. The results indicated that the inclusion of up to 30 and 9.0% HS and HO, respectively, to diets of laying hens had no significant effects on hen performance, egg quality, or plasma level of metabolites (proteins, glucose, uric acid, and cholesterol) and electrolytes (Na, K, Cl, P, and Ca). Overall plasma enzyme concentrations, particularly gamma-glutamyl transferase, were significantly (P < 0.01) lowest at the 10 and 20% levels of HS inclusion, or at the 4.5% HO level of inclusion of the hempseed products compared with the higher levels or control fed hens. Similar effects were also observed for plasma aspartate aminotransferase levels but with the HS enriched diets only (P < 0.05), particularly being lowest at the inclusion levels of 10 and 20% HS compared with the control. The results may imply a possible protective effect of HS- and HO-containing diets, particularly at 10% HS, 20% HS, and 4.5% HO levels, on liver damage/injury. In summary, both HO and HS appear to be well tolerated by laying hens as judged by markers of plasma clinical chemistry supporting the safety and efficacy of hemp products for use in laying hen rations.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".