Impact of essential oils and organic acids on the growth performance, digestive functions and immunity of broiler chickens
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of the experiment was to study the effects of feeding blends of sorbic acid, fumaric acid, and thymol (EOA) on growth performance, digestive functions, and immunity of broiler chickens. A total of 640 one-day-old male Cobb 500 chicks with similar BW (41.8 ± 0.6 g) were randomly divided into 4 dietary treatment groups consisting of 10 replicates with 16 birds per replicate and fed a basal diet until d 42 (CON) or diets with 0.15 g/kg enramycin during the grower period (AG), 0.30 g/kg EOA during the grower period (EG), or 0.30 g/kg EOA during the finisher period (EF). At d 42, the feed conversion ratio was reduced (P < 0.05) for birds in EG group compared with other groups. Birds in EG group showed a higher villus height of the duodenum and jejunum and muscular layers of the duodenum and ileum than birds in CON group (P < 0.05). Compared with other groups, crypt depth of the jejunum and ileum was markedly increased (P < 0.05) by EOA supplementation during the finisher period at d 42. The EOA supplementation during grower period increased significantly lipase, trypsin and chymotrypsin activities of the duodenum at d 21 and 42, as well as lipase and trypsin at d 21, and trypsin and chymotrypsin at d 42 in the jejunum, and trypsin and chymotrypsin activities of the ileum at d 21 compared to the control diet (P < 0.05). Birds of EG and EF groups showed a higher (P < 0.05) spleen index than birds of CON group. The level of secretory immunoglobulin A in duodenal and ileal mucosa was increased (P < 0.05) in EF group at d 42 compared with other groups. In conclusion, the results indicate that EOA can be effectively applied in broiler diets, especially during the grower phase by improving intestinal morphology and increasing digestive enzyme activity.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".