Review: Supplementation of phytase and carbohydrases to diets for poultry
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Woyengo, T. A. and Nyachoti, C. M. 2011. Review: Supplementation of phytase and carbohydrases to diets for poultry. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 91: 177–192. Feedstuffs of plant origin contain anti-nutritional factors such as phytic acid (PA) and non-starch polysaccharides (NSP), which limit nutrient utilization in poultry. Phytic acid contains phosphorus, which is poorly digested by poultry, and has the capacity to bind to and reduce the utilisation of other nutrients, whereas NSP are indigestible and have the capacity to reduce nutrient utilisation by encapsulation. Supplemental phytase and NSP-degrading enzymes (carbohydrases) can, respectively, hydrolyze PA and NSP, alleviating the negative effects of these anti-nutritional factors. In feedstuffs of plant origin, PA is located within the cells, whereas NSP are located in cell walls, and hence it has been hypothesized that phytase and carbohydrases can act synergistically in improving nutrient utilization because the carbohydrases can hydrolyze the NSP in cell walls to increase the accessibility of phytase to PA. However, the response to supplementation of a combination of these enzymes is variable and dependent on several factors, including the type of carbohydrase supplement used, dietary NSP composition, calcium and non-phytate phosphorus contents, and endogenous phytase activity. These factors are discussed, and areas that need further research for optimising the use of a combination of phytase and carbohydrases in poultry diets are suggested.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it