Dilution of broiler chicken diets with whole hulless barley
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An experiment was conducted to determine the effects of diluting broiler diets with increasing levels of whole hulless barley (WHB) on growth performance and nutrient digestibility. A total of 144 one-day-old male broiler chicks were fed the same starter diet with 5% WHB dilution. Grower diets (16 to 24 d) were diluted with 0, 7.5, 15, and 22.5% WHB, and finisher diets (25 to 36 d) were diluted with 0, 15, 30, and 45% WHB, respectively. All diets were supplemented with a commercial dietary enzyme. Birds fed the 22.5 and 45% WHB in grower and finisher diets had lower 36-d BW (P ≤ 0.05) than those fed the other treatments. From 25 to 36 d, birds fed the 30 and 45% WHB diets were less efficient (P ≤ 0.05) than those fed the undiluted diet. The AME value of the 22.5% WHB grower diet was lower (P ≤ 0.05) than those of the other grower diets, and the AME value of the 15% WHB grower diet was significantly higher (P ≤ 0.05) than that of the undiluted diet. All WHB finisher diets had lower (P ≤ 0.05) CP contents than the undiluted diet. The AME values of the finisher diets diluted with WHB were lower (P ≤ 0.05) than that of the undiluted diet. On the basis of these growth performance and digestibility data, optimal growth performance may be achieved by diluting broiler chicken diets with WHB up to a level of 7.5% in the grower period and 15% in the finisher period.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".