Effect of hens fed dietary flaxseed with and without a fatty liver supplement on hepatic, plasma and production characteristics relevant to fatty liver haemorrhagic syndrome in laying hens
Bibliographic record
Abstract
1. Two long-term experiments were conducted with Single Comb White Leghorn (SCWL) hens (line UCD-003) predisposed to fatty liver haemorrhagic syndrome (FLHS). The first investigated the effect of adding a fatty liver supplement to the diet of laying hens prior to the onset of lay, and continuing either until peak production or throughout 39 weeks into lay. The second experiment, lasting 9 months into lay, investigated the effect of adding a fatty liver supplement, with or without 100 g/kg dietary ground flaxseed, to the diet. Body weight, feed intake, plasma triglycerides (in experiment 2) and egg production were measured throughout the experiment. Liver weight, liver fat content, liver malondialdehyde (MDA) content and liver haemorrhage score and fatty acid content of liver fat (in experiment 2) were measured at the end of each experiment. 2. In experiment 1, hens given diets containing the fatty liver supplement had higher egg production and eggshell strength, but there was no difference in liver parameters including MDA content or haemorrhage score compared with controls. 3. At the end of experiment 2, hens on 100 g/kg flaxseed diets had lower body weight, liver weight, liver dry matter and fat content, and plasma triglyceride concentrations than hens given the control diets. 4. Liver haemorrhage score was positively correlated with liver weight, but not with liver fat content, plasma triglyceride concentration or liver MDA content. This suggests that reducing the liver lipid content or feeding fatty liver supplements may not be as effective in controlling FLHS as controlling the size of the liver.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".