MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3176342443 · doi:10.5713/ab.21.0030

Hot-melt extruded copper sulfate affects the growth performance, meat quality, and copper bioavailability of broiler chickens

2021· article· en· W3176342443 on OpenAlexaff
Min Ju Kim, Abdolreza Hosseindoust, Jun Hyung Lee, Kwang Yeoul Kim, Tae Gyun Kim, B. J. Chae

Bibliographic record

VenueAnimal Bioscience · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Nutrition and Physiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersMinistry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs
KeywordsBroilerBioavailabilityCecumCopperAnimal scienceChemistryFeed conversion ratioCompletely randomized designFood scienceBody weightBiologyEndocrinologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: This study was conducted to evaluate the effects of the supplementation of diets of broiler chickens with hot-melt extruded CuSO4 (HME-Cu) on their growth performance, nutrient digestibility, gut microbiota, small intestinal morphology, meat quality, and copper (Cu) bioavailability. METHODS: A total of 225 broilers (Ross 308), one-day old and initial weight 39.14 g, were weighed and distributed between 15 cages (15 birds per cage) in a completely randomized experimental design with 3 treatments (diets) and 5 replicates per treatment. Cages were allotted to three treatments including control (without supplemental Cu), IN-Cu (16 mg/kg of CuSO4), and HME-Cu (16 mg/kg of HME processed CuSO4). RESULTS: The HME-Cu treatment tended to increase the overall body weight gain (p<0.10). The apparent digestibility of Cu was increased by supplementation of HME-Cu at phase 2 (p<0.05). The Escherichia coli count in cecum tended to decrease with the supplementation with Cu (p<0.10). In addition, the HME-Cu treatment had a higher pH of breast meat than the control and IN-Cu treatments (p<0.05). Significant increases in the cooking loss, water-holding capacity, and lightness in the breast were observed in the HME-Cu treatment compared to the control (p<0.05). The Cu content of excreta increased with the Cu supplementation (p<0.05). The concentration of excreta Cu in broilers was decreased in the HME-Cu compared to the IN-Cu in phase 2 (p<0.05). The Cu concentration in the liver was increased with the HME-Cu supplementation, compared with the control diets (p<0.05). CONCLUSION: This study showed that HME-Cu supplementation at the requirement level (16 mg/kg diets) in broiler diets did not affect the growth performance and the physiological function of Cu in broilers. However, supplementation of Cu in HME form improved the meat quality and the bioavailability of Cu.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.831
Threshold uncertainty score0.349

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 designBench or experimental
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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnimal BioscienceSame topicAnimal Nutrition and PhysiologyFrench-language works237,207