MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2162998323 · doi:10.4141/a02-095

Effect of pelleting and enzyme supplementation on variation in feed value of wheat-based diets fed to broiler chicks

2003· article· en· W2162998323 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
T. Scott, F.G. Silversides, R. T. Zijlstra

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Animal Science · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Nutrition and Physiology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBroilerCultivarBioassayBiologyAnimal scienceWhole wheatFood scienceAgronomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The effect of wheat cultivar, pelleting, and enzyme supplementation was measured with a broiler chick bioassay comparing differences in feed intake, growth, FCR and metabolisable e nergy (ME) level. Samples of two wheat cultivars from each of six classes were ground and were either unpelleted or pelleted and ground before including (80%) in mash diets with or without enzyme (Avizyme 1302). Two common control diets were fed in the two bioassay series required to evaluate the 48 diets. Each diet was fed to four cages of six male broilers from 4 to 17 d of age. Apparent metabolisable energy (AME) was determined on excreta collected at 16 d of age. There was more than a 25% difference in feed intake among the 48 diets; the largest contribution of the variation was due to wheat cultivar. Feed intake was significantly increased by enzyme addition and decreased by pelleting. Variation in feed intake explained more than 70% of the variation in body weight and had only a minor association with determined AME. The AME of all wheat samples, except the two Durum wheats, was increased by both enzyme supplementation and processing. The increase in AME with processing may represent an anomaly of using different bioassay series to measure unpelleted and pelleted wheat samples or it may represent changes in AME of all wheat samples, except Durum wheats, with storage after harvesting. The relative AME and FCR measurements for the 12 wheat samples were similar whether the wheats were pelleted or not. However, there was no relationship between measurements of feed intake when the different cultivars of unpelleted and pelleted wheat were compared. The marked variation in feed intake and growth rate of broilers fed different cultivars of wheat continues to be a concern as it suggests that other factors may limit intake and prevent the broiler from obtaining the required levels of nutrients from the diet. Key words: Wheat, feed processing, enzymes, feed value, broilers

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.917
Threshold uncertainty score0.421

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.229 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations17
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Animal ScienceSame topicAnimal Nutrition and PhysiologyFrench-language works237,207