Effect of elevated dietary amino acid levels in high canola meal diets on productive traits and cecal microbiota population of broiler chickens in a pair-feeding study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A pair-feeding study was conducted to determine if reduced feed intake (FI) in broiler chickens fed high canola meal (CM) diets per se accounts for reduced growth performance and whether this lower growth rate can be mitigated by increasing dietary amino acid (AA) levels. Five experimental wheat-based diets were formulated as follows: soybean meal (SBM) diet, high CM diet with normal AA concentration, and high CM diets with 3, 6, or 9% additional AA concentration (Lys, Met+Cys, Thr, Ile, Arg, and Val). Another group of birds was pair-fed with SBM diet to the consumption levels of birds fed CM diet with normal AA. There were 6 replicates of 17 male 10-day-old Ross 308 chicks per treatment over grower and finisher periods. Birds fed the CM diets had reduced FI and BWG, but improved FCR (P < 0.01) compared to SBM ad libitum fed birds. The SBM pair-fed birds gained the same weight and exhibited similar FCR compared to CM fed birds. Additional 9% AA improved FCR (P < 0.01) compared to SBM and CM diets with normal AA. No significant differences were observed in ileal digestibility of DM, energy, crude protein, and AA between CM with normal AA and SBM diets. The additional 6 and 9% AA in CM diets increased digestibility of crude protein and some AA (P < 0.05). SBM ad libitum and CM + 6 and 9% AA fed birds had the highest and lowest relative weight of abdominal fat, respectively (P < 0.05). Addition of 6 and 9% AA in CM diets increased relative carcass and breast yields (P < 0.01). Serum triglyceride level was higher in SBM ad libitum fed birds (P < 0.05). The composition of microbiota in the ceca was not affected by treatments. This study showed that reduced growth of birds fed high CM diets is primarily mediated through reduced FI. This growth depression could partially be ameliorated by increasing dietary AA levels.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".