A Study on the Interaction of Xylanase and Phytase Enzymes in Wheat-Based Diets Fed to Commercial White and Brown Egg Laying Hens
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A trial was conducted to investigate potential interactions between phytase and xylanase enzymes in wheat-based laying diets. Hens (480 ISA-White and 480 ISA-Brown) were distributed into 160 experimental units and fed one of 10 diets containing 75 to 77% wheat from 33 to 64 wk of age with a diet change at 49 wk. Two diets were adequate in P content (0.3 and 0.25% available P in the 2 phases) with or without xylanase (0 or 2,000 U/kg; Avizyme 2300, Danisco Animal Nutrition, Marlborough, Wiltshire, United Kingdom), and 8 diets had reduced P (0.2 and 0.15% available P) with or without xylanase and phytase (0, 300, 500, and 700 ppu/kg; Phyzyme 5000G, Danisco Animal Nutrition). Egg production was higher for ISA-Brown than for ISA-White hens, and ISA-Brown hens were larger. Eggs from ISA-Brown hens had lower albumen height; higher egg, shell, and albumen weights; and lower yolk weight than those from ISA-White hens. Egg production was not affected by the diet. In P-reduced diets without xylanase, phytase significantly increased BW gain in the first period with no change in feed intake or feed efficiency. In P-adequate diets, xylanase increased egg and albumen weight and albumen height. In P-reduced diets with xylanase, increasing levels of phytase increased egg and albumen weight. This trial demonstrated no negative interactions between these enzymes for production traits and no interactions between the diet and strain of hen. These data suggest that poultry producers can use these enzymes individually or together in feed for the Brown and White egg layers used in this study without concern for the strain of hen.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 | 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".