MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2746833938 · doi:10.5539/jas.v9n9p108

Performance, Carcass Percentage, and Production Cost for Awassi Lambs Fed High Energy Diet for Short Fattening Period

2017· article· en· W2746833938 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mysaa Ata, Fatima A. Al-Lataifeh, Mohammad Altarawneh

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agricultural Science · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAgriculture Sustainability and Environmental Impact
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAwassiAnimal scienceFeed conversion ratioBody weightBiologyWeight gainCarcass weightEnergy costHigh energyEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An experiment was conducted to indicate the effect of feeding high energy diet for 45 days on male and female Awassi lambs’ performance, carcass percentage, and cost of production. A total of twenty four Awassi lambs (12 males, and 12 females) averaging 18.2±0.70 kg body weight were used. Lambs were assigned randomly to two different groups (groups A and B); each group had twelve lambs (6 males and 6 females) and fed two different diets (low energy diet and high energy diet). Feed intake, total gain, average daily gain and feed conversion ratio was calculated and body measurements (height and length) were recorded. Lambs were slaughtered at the end of experiment, to evaluate carcass percentage. Cost of production was calculated based on ingredients’ price at the time of the experiment. Final body weight, weight gain, and average daily gain were greater (p < 0.05); while feed conversion ratio was lower (p < 0.05) for lambs fed high energy diet than lambs fed low energy diet. Body length differences measured to be greater (p < 0.05) for male lambs fed high energy diet than other lambs. Fasted weight, hot carcass weight, and dressing percentage were higher (p < 0.05) for lambs fed the high energy diet. Cost of gain was lower (p < 0.05) for lambs in group B compared to lambs in group A. Therefore, the economical efficiency in this experiment was greater for lambs fed high energy diet than lambs fed the control diet during 45 days fattening period.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.233 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Agricultural ScienceSame topicAgriculture Sustainability and Environmental ImpactFrench-language works237,207