Bibliographic record
Abstract
Studies involved in vitro and in vivo trials to evaluate the nutritional quality of 2 Chinese double\|low rapeseed meal samples(A and B), one of which(A)was processed under an excessive heat using the roasting\|expelling technology,another of which(B) was pre\|press solvent exfacted using conventional mild heat treatment conditions, and also l Canadian Canola meal. In the in vitro trial, the digestible protein contents in the samples are 73.6%,59.0% and 51.0%, for Canola, A, B, respectively(P0.01). The effects of inclusion 300 g.kg -1 of these samples in the conventional diets on the performance of the broiler chicks were examined in the second trial. Body weight gain, feed intake, and feed conversion efficiency differed much (P0.05 or P0.01) among the samples in every period of the trial. Meanwhile, nitrogen retention(NR) was higher in Canola and B than in A(P0.05);NDF N digestibility was lowest in A(P0.01), which resulted in the low NR and poor performance for broiler chicks in this treatment. It suggested that either overheated or under\|heated processing be critical for the quality of double\|low rapeseed meal.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".