MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2921399421 · doi:10.3382/ps/pez044

Assessing the effect of rate and extent of starch digestion on laying hen performance

2019· article· en· W2921399421 on OpenAlexafffund
Eugenia Herwig, Dawn A. Abbott, K. Schwean-Lardner, H.L. Classen

Bibliographic record

VenuePoultry Science · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Nutrition and Physiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersNational Research Council CanadaUniversity of SaskatchewanCanadian Poultry Research Council
KeywordsAnimal scienceDigestion (alchemy)StarchFeed conversion ratioBroilerChemistryBody weightAmylaseBiologyFood scienceBiochemistryEnzymeEndocrinologyChromatography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The inclusion of starch with a lower rate and extent of digestion has proven to be beneficial in broiler production. However, less is known about its effect on laying hen performance. Therefore, 6 diets were formulated to produce differing ratios (0:100, 20:80, 40:60, 60:40, 80:20, and 100:0) of semi-purified wheat starch (rapidly digested) and pea starch (PS; slowly digested). Each diet was fed to 120 conventionally caged Lohmann LSL lite hens in groups of 12, from 27 to 46 wk of age, and its effects on performance and feather covering were assessed. Data were analyzed by regression analysis, and the significance level was chosen at P ≤ 0.05. Hen-day egg production (HDP) was high (97.05%) and unaffected by PS concentration for 0 to 10 wk of the trial, followed by a quadratic-shaped HDP, with an estimated maximum at 67% PS concentration, for the 10 to 20 wk period of the trial. Overall (0 to 20 wk), HDP increased linearly with PS. No effect on egg weight was found (average weight = 59.6±2.1 g), but eggshells were thickest at the 55% PS concentration. Body weight gain was affected by PS concentration and maximized at 49% PS. Body weight uniformity and mortality were not affected by dietary treatment. Feed intake increased linearly with PS from 102 to 109 g/hen/d, while feed: egg mass ratio was minimal at 26% PS. Using a scale from 1 to 4 per body part (neck, wings, back, vent and breast), only neck feather cover increased linearly with PS, from 3.0 (0% PS) to 3.2/4 (100% PS). However, back and total feather coverage showed a trend (P = 0.054 and P = 0.079 respectively) to increase linearly with PS as well (from 3.7 to 3.9/4 and 15.6 to 16.6/20, respectively). In summary, feeding PS at low to intermediate concentrations improved laying hen performance. Further research should focus on the mechanisms involved in this effect.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.622
Threshold uncertainty score0.099

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations5
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePoultry ScienceSame topicAnimal Nutrition and PhysiologyFrench-language works237,207