Mesquite Extract as Phytogenic Additive to Improve the Nutrition of Sheep
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Four concentrations (0, 200, 400, 600 and 800 mg extract per ml of water) of mesquite extract were used as phytogenic additive to verify the potential to increase the nutritional value of the feed, ruminal parameters (primarily propionate production) and nitrogen use efficiency, microbial protein synthesis and quantify the reduction of ciliated protozoa and characterize the ingestive behavior of sheep. Ten adult male sheep were subjected to a 5 × 5 double Latin square design. Prior to feeding, the animals received the mesquite extract. Nutrient intake was estimated from the difference of the amount of feed provided and the total surplus. Rumen content samples were collected to evaluate the profile of short-chain fatty acids, ammonia nitrogen, pH, ciliated protozoa, turnover rate and disappearance rate. To estimate the microbial protein synthesis, the technique of purine derivatives was used. The mesquite extract quadratically increased (P < 0.05) the digestibility of dry matter, organic matter, crude protein and total digestible nutrients, as well as increased propionate production, acetate:propionate ratio and microbial protein synthesis. The numbers of ciliate protozoa in the rumen decreased as a result of mesquite extract inclusion in the diet. The use of mesquite pod extract at a concentration of 488 mg/mL is recommended to improve digestibility of dry matter, organic matter, crude protein and total digestible nutrients, and to optimize microbial protein synthesis and increase propionic acid production.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".