Effect of Feeding Graded Levels of Poultry Slaughter Waste on Performance of Labrador Pups
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Diets containing processed poultry slaughter waste (PSW) at 0, 10 and 20% levels in diets 1, 2 and 3, respectively were fed to the Labrador pups and during a 20 weeks long growth trial the ADG was 109.56±7.62, 122.95±3.39 and 124.46±4.49g for diet 1 (control), 2 and 3, respectively, and feed efficiency was similar on all diets. CP efficiency was 13.56% higher on diets 3 and 2 than on control. ME efficiency (kcal/g gain) of diets 3 (8.82±0.33) and 2 (8.92±0.27) was significantly (P<0.05) higher than control diet (10.64±0.73). The DMI/100 kg body weight was comparable among the diets. DM digestibility of diet 3 (68.33±0.85) was higher (P<0.05) than diet 1 (63.75±0.93). There was no significant difference among diets for the digestibility of OM, CP and NFE. The CF digestibility of diets 3 and 2 was significantly (P<0.05) higher than control diet. The EE digestibility of diet 3 was significantly higher than diets 1 and 2, while comparable between diets 1 and 2. PSW containing diets were economical and it could be included up to 20% level in dog diets.
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 | 0.000 | 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".