Use of dietary enzyme inclusion and seed germination to improve feeding value of sorghum for broiler chicks.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Several methods have been employed to reduce anti-nutritive factors of sorghum and improve nutritional value of it to use as an energy source in poultry feed. A study was conducted to assess the effects of enzyme supplementation and seed germination on the feeding value of sorghum for broiler chicks. Four iso-nitrogenous and iso-energetic NRC-recommended diets with and without sorghum (intact or germinated seed) were evaluated. Intact sorghum-included diet was tested with or without phytase and carbohydrase. Four hundred 3-day old unsexed Cobb broiler chicks were randomly distributed into 20 pens. Five pens of birds were randomly assigned to each of four dietary treatment groups. Body weight, feed intake was measured on 21, 42 and 49 days of age. Data were subjected to analysis of variance as a completely randomized design using the GLM procedure of SAS. Dietary treatment had no significant effect on body weight gain of chicks except for growing period. Chicks fed control (corn-) and germinated sorghum-based diets had higher body weight gain than other dietary treatment groups. Germination significantly improved feed to gain ratio of chicks. Enzyme supplementation had no statistically significant effect on chicks' performance.
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".