MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2105928320 · doi:10.4141/a03-113

Wheat by-products in poultry nutrition. Part II. Nutritive value of wheat screenings, bakery by-products and wheat mill run and their improved utilization by enzyme supplementation

2004· article· en· W2105928320 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Danuta Boros, B.A. Slominski, W. Guenter, L. D. Campbell, Owen Jones

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Animal Science · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Nutrition and Physiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersGovernment of CanadaUniversity of Manitoba
KeywordsBroilerStarterWeight gainFeed conversion ratioFood scienceAnimal scienceMealSoybean mealBody weightNutrientBiologyBiotechnology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A series of experiments was conducted to determine the nutritive value of wheat screenings, bakery by-products and wheat mill run used by the feed industry in Canada and to investigate the effect of enzyme supplementation on available energy content, nutrient digestibility and broiler chicken growth performance. Broiler chicken performance (2-wk growth trial) was compared using a wheat/soybean meal-based control diet and diets substituted with wheat by-products (wheat screenings, 200 g kg -1 ; bakery by-products or mill run, 100 g kg -1 ). In addition, diets containing one sample of each of the by-products were fed to broiler chickens with enzyme supplementation (Superzyme W ® ). Chicken performance was not affected by dietary substitution of wheat by-products for wheat as values for control, wheat screenings (three samples), bakery by-products (two samples) and mill run (one sample) were similar for body weight gain (514, 520, 515, 500 g bird -1 ) and for feed to gain ratio (1.52, 1.52, 1.52, 1.50), respectively. Response to enzyme supplementation was highest for wheat screenings showing a statistically significant (P ≤ 0.05) improvement in body weight gain (523 vs. 548 g bird -1 ) and feed to gain ratio (1.54 vs. 1.47). To further substantiate the importance of enzyme supplementation, a long-term production trial with broiler chickens was conducted. Five replicate pens of 60 birds per treatment were used in the starter (21 d) and grower (16 d) phases of the experiment consisting of three treatments: positive control (PC) (wheat/soybean meal/fish meal), negative control (NC) (wheat/wheat screenings/barley/soybean/ canola meal) and NC + Enzyme (Superzyme W ® ). In comparison to PC, the NC diet contained 5% less metabolizable energy, 8–10% less crude protein, amino acids and calcium and 25% less available phosphorus. Body weight gain and feed conversion ratio averaged 2.14, 2.10, 2.17 kg bird -1 and 1.68, 1.76, 1.66 for PC, NC and NC + Enzyme, respectively. A significant (P < 0.05) improvement in broiler chicken performance with enzyme supplementation was further substantiated by the same magnitude of difference in dry matter (71.2, 68.7, 75.1%), starch (92.5, 90.3, 95.6%), non-starch poly saccharides (NSP) (4.8, 15.0, 36.1%), energy (AME) (12.37, 11.83, 12.84 MJ kg -1 ) and phytate (44.3, 37.5, 69.5%) digestibilities. It is evident from this study that the use of wheat by-products in concert with an effective enzyme supplement in broiler chicken diets will allow for optimum growth performance. Key words: Broilers, by-products, feeding value, enzymes

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.164
Threshold uncertainty score0.810

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations19
Published2004
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Animal ScienceSame topicAnimal Nutrition and PhysiologyFrench-language works237,207