The effects of dietary dried fruit pomaces on growth performance and gastrointestinal biochemistry of turkey poults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
One-day-old female turkeys were randomly assigned to five dietary treatments and were fed for 15 weeks diets containing 5% of cellulose (control, C) or 5% of dried fruit pomaces (apple, black currant, strawberry, seedless strawberry; AP, BCP, SP, SSP respectively). In weeks 11-15 of feeding, all diets were supplemented with 2.5% of linseed oil. The crude fibre content of fruit pomaces ranged from 56.5% in AP to 62.9% in SP. In comparison with AP, berry fruit pomaces (BCP, SP and SSP) were characterised by a higher content of neutral detergent fibre - NDF (41.2% vs. 52.7-59.3%) and lignin (13.24% vs. 21.80-25.56%). A monomer analysis revealed that cellulose was the main non-starch polysaccharide (NSP) in fruit pomaces, whereas their pectin content was low. Polyphenol content was determined at below 6 g/kg in AP, at approximately 12 g/kg in BCP and SP, and at 32.8 g/kg in SSP. There were no significant differences (p > 0.05) in final body weight of birds. After 15 weeks of feeding fruit pomaces to turkeys, the relative weight of the small intestine with digesta was higher in group AP, and lower in group SSP, as compared to controls. Dietary fruit pomaces decreased the dry matter (DM) concentration and lowered the pH of the small intestinal digesta, except the AP and SSP treatments respectively. In the caeca, significantly reduced concentrations of ammonia or putrefactive short-chain fatty acids (SCFA) upon dietary fruit pomaces were observed. Fruit pomaces did not influence the concentrations or the total pool of short-chain fatty acids, but led to a significant increase in butyric proportion in the SCFA profile at the expense propionate.
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) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 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".