MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2119178070 · doi:10.1093/ps/83.6.985

The Effect of Phytase Enzyme and Level on Nutrient Extraction by Broilers

2004· article· en· W2119178070 on OpenAlexaff
F.G. Silversides, T. Scott, M.R. Bedford

Bibliographic record

VenuePoultry Science · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Nutrition and Physiology
Canadian institutionsNova Scotia Department of Agriculture
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhytaseBroilerSoybean mealPhosphorusEnzymePseudomonas fluorescensFood scienceMealBiologyNutrientRapeseedChemistryAnimal scienceBiochemistryBacteria

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Three experimental phytase enzyme preparations derived from the same Escherichia coli gene but produced in Saccharomyces cerevisiae (A), Pichia pastoris (B), and Pseudomonas fluorescens (C) were compared with a commercial enzyme preparation by addition to wheat-soybean meal diets fed to broiler chicks. A positive control diet contained sufficient available phosphorus for normal broiler growth and a negative control diet was phosphorus deficient. The 4 enzymes were added to the negative control diet at 3 levels each (150, 450, and 1,250 U/kg), and all diets were pelleted above 80 degrees C. Broiler chicks were fed experimental diets from 4 to 21 d. Chick performance and nutrient digestibility showed that the pel leting process inactivated enzymes A and C and the commercial enzyme. When added to the negative control diet, enzyme B had positive effects on broiler performance and calcium and phosphorus digestibility, and increasing levels of enzyme had greater positive effects. Enzyme B also increased the AME and protein digestibility over those of either control diet. These results suggest that enzyme B was not inactivated by pelleting above 80 degrees C, whereas the other enzymes were.

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 score0.471
Threshold uncertainty score0.276

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.232 · 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

Citations46
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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