Effect of Dietary Additives on Rabbit Performance, Carcass Traits and Some Blood Constituents under Egyptation Summer Season
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sixty 7-week-old New Zealand White rabbits were randomly distributed into 5 equal experimental groups. The experimental rabbits were fed the tested diets till 14 weeks of age during summer season. The basal diet without feed additives (control; T1) and the other experimental diets were supplemented with enzymes at 0.5 g/kg (T2), organic acids at 1.0 g/kg (T3), Beta-pro at 0.2 g/kg (T4) or their combination (T5). The criteria of response were body weight, weight gain, feed consumption, feed conversion ratio, some blood constituents, carcass traits and economic efficiency. The obtained results can be summarized as follows: Positive effects of feed additives were observed on live body weight, daily weight gain and feed conversion of growing rabbits. There were no significant effects on blood parameters or carcass traits due to feed additives. It can be concluded that dietary Beta-pro (enzymes+probiotics) or a combination of enzymes, organic acids and Beta-pro at the tested levels can be used to improve the rabbit performance, with no adverse effects on carcass characteristics or blood parameters.
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.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 it