Xylanase in diets for growing pigs and broiler chicks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Experiments designed to determine the effects of feeding graded levels of xylanase to 10-kg pigs (exp. 1) and 1-d old broiler chicks (exp. 2) are presented. Pigs received diet composed of corn, rye, wheat, and SBM for 28 d, whereas chickens were fed diet composed of rye, wheat, and SBM for 21 d. Six dietary treatments consisting of a control diet or control plus xylanase (in units kg-1) at 400, 800, 1600, 3200 or 32 000 were fed. Graded levels of xylanase had no effect on growth performance of 10-kg pigs. There were diet and age effects (P < 0.05) on digestibility of DM, CP, and Ca in pigs. Linear and quadratic responses (P < 0.05) in final weight, weight gain, and gain:feed of broiler chicks to graded levels of xylanase were observed in exp. 2. In exp. 2, the effect of xylanase became apparent (P < 0.05) at 800 U kg-1; there were no differences in response to xylanase at 3200 and 32 000 U kg-1. In conclusion, xylanase improved growth performance in 1-d-old broilers fed a diet composed of rye, wheat, and SBM but not in 10-kg pigs that received a diet composed of corn, rye, wheat, and SBM. Key words: Broiler chicks, non-starch polysaccharides, pigs, xylanase
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 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".