Effects of Replacing Groundnut Cake with <i>Moringa oleifera</i> Leaf Meal in the Diets of Grower Rabbits
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Seventy two (72) grower rabbits were used to assess the replacement of groundnut cake with Moringa oleifera leaf meal in the diets of grower rabbits and determining its effect on growth; nitrogen digestibility and the economics of rabbit production. There were six (6) dietary treatments with Moringa oleifera leaf meal replacing groundnut cake at 0, 20, 40, 60, 80 and 100%; each treatment was replicated three times with four rabbits per replicate in a completely randomize blocked design (CRBD). Proximate analysis of Moringa oleifera leaves on air-cured basis showed that the leaves contained Dry Matter 93.4, Crude Protein 24.8, Crude Fibre 11.1, Ether Extract 2.1, Ash 8.7 and Nitrogen Free Extract 53.5%; with a Metabolizable Energy of 3 316.52 Kcal/kg. Results showed that the final body weight, body weight gain, feed intake and feed to gain ratio showed significant difference ( P 0.05). The study revealed that Moringa oleifera leaf is rich in nutrient and can be used to replace 60% of Groundnut cake in the diets of grower rabbits.
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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".