Phase-feeding affects crude protein intake, excretion, and retention of broilers from 21 to 63 days
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An experiment was conducted to assess effects of phase-feeding (PF) on crude protein (CP) intake, excretion, and retention of broilers. Six birds were housed individually and were fed diets formulated using recommendations from National Research Council (NRC) or linear regression equations. Two PF treatments were prepared: standard (PF) and low (PF10), in which predicted lysine, sulfur amino acids, and threonine recommendations were reduced by 10%. For PF and PF10, two diets (high-nutrient and low-nutrient density) were blended in variable quantities to produce rations matching predicted amino acid requirements over two intervals. Birds were fed a single NRC grower and finisher diet or a series of PF and PF10 diets that were switched every other day. With the exception of weight gain, which was lower for PF than for birds fed the NRC and PF10 diets, no differences in growth performance were observed. Both PF diets reduced CP intake numerically from 21-43 d and 21-63 d, and significantly from 43-63 d (P < 0.055). Retention of CP was not impacted by diet although there was a tendency toward increased CP retention in birds fed the PF10 diet from 43-63 d (P = 0.071). Excretion of CP during the finisher period was reduced (P < 0.05) for birds fed PF and PF10 diets, and total CP excretion was numerically reduced (4.0% and 8.6%, respectively). These data indicate that in addition to economic benefits, PF may result in environmental benefits.
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) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".