Studies on the metabolizable energy content of ground full-fat flaxseed fed in mash, pellet, and crumbled diets assayed with birds of different ages
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Four experiments were carried out to determine the AMEn of ground flaxseed in chickens of different ages and to study the effect of feeding flaxseed in pelleted or crumbled diets on flaxseed AMEn. A corn-soybean meal basal diet was prepared, in which the energy-yielding ingredients were substituted with ground flaxseed at 5, 10, 15, or 20%. Experiments 1, 2, and 3 consisted of these five dietary treatments replicated six times using 9-d-, 6-wk-, and 79-wk-old birds, respectively. A total collection procedure was used to measure diet AMEn, and linear regression analyses were used to calculate the AMEn value of flaxseed for birds at different ages. Experiment 4 involved birds fed either a basal or a 10% ground flaxseed diet prepared as mash, pellets, or crumbles. The flaxseed AMEn values obtained with 9-d- and 6-wk-old chickens were 2,118 and 2,055 kcal/kg, respectively. These values contrast with those of Experiments 3 and 4, in which mature roosters were fed mash diets with AMEn values of 3,560 and 3,654 kcal/kg, respectively. In Experiment 4, a significant improvement in flaxseed AMEn was observed when diets were pelleted or crumbled (4,578 and 4,277 kcal/kg, respectively). We concluded that the difference in AMEn of flaxseed observed in young birds vs. that found in mature birds was likely due to a greater tolerance of the latter to flaxseed, with less evidence of diarrhea. Feeding flaxseed in pellet or crumbled diets can significantly increase AMEn value.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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".