Effects of Dietary 1,4-Diaminobutane (Putrescine) on Eggshell Quality and Laying Performance of Hens Laying Thin-Shelled Eggs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Experiments were conducted to evaluate the potential for dietary 1,4-diaminobutane (putrescine) to influence eggshell quality and overall laying performance in hens. Forty-eight, 60-wk-old White Leghorn hens laying thin-shelled eggs were fed a corn and soybean meal-based diet supplemented with 0.00 (control), 0.05, 0.10, or 0.15% putrescine for 4 wk. Twelve hens that laid thick-shelled eggs were also fed the control diet. The feeding of supplemental putrescine decreased feed consumption; however, egg weight decreased only at higher levels of supplementation. Increasing dietary levels of putrescine responded quadratically in eggshell deformation, eggshell weight, and eggshell weight as a percentage of egg weight (P < 0.05). There were no significant differences in shell deformation, shell thickness, or shell weight when comparing hens laying thick-shelled eggs and those laying thin-shelled eggs that were fed 0.05% supplemental putrescine. Calcium intake, calcium retention, and calcium balance decreased linearly (P < 0.05) with increasing levels of dietary putrescine. Pancreatic putrescine concentrations were significantly higher (P < 0.05) in hens laying thick-shelled eggs compared with hens laying thin-shelled eggs. It appeared that pancreatic cells synthesized more polyamines in hens laying thick-shelled eggs. This increase in polyamines might have caused improved eggshell quality by increasing calcium transport. It was concluded that 0.05% supplemental putrescine improved eggshell quality; however, higher levels proved to be toxic.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".