Growth performance and intestinal health of broilers fed a standard or low-protein diet with the addition of a protease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We evaluated the effects of a protease supplementation on the growth performance and intestinal health of broilers. Cobb chicks (392; 1-42 d) were divided into four treatments (seven replicates of 14 birds each). There were two feed formulations: a standard diet (SD) and a low crude protein and digestible amino acids diet (Low CP&AA). The two diets were either supplemented (+P) or not (−P) with a protease (Jefo Protease; 1.25 g kg−1). Performance was evaluated by feeding phases (1-7, 8-21, 21-35, and 35-42 d). On day 28, ileum samples were analyzed by a morphometric index for histological alterations (I See Inside Scoring System – ISI). Broilers fed the Low CP&AA had a poor feed conversion ratio (FCR); however, the addition of the protease to the Low CP&AA positively affected FCR and body weight gain and promoted a performance similar to the group fed SD−P. Birds fed diets supplemented with the protease presented the best ISI morphological index, mainly as a result of the low number of alterations regarding the lamina propria, epithelial thickness, and enterocyte proliferation. It is possible to conclude that the enzyme improves feed conversion and lamina propria, epithelial thickness, and proliferation of enterocytes index of broiler chickens when added to a standard diet or with a low crude protein and digestible amino acids diet.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".