Evaluation of standardized mixture of synbiotic-glyconutrients supplemented in lambs finished during summer season in tropical environment: growth performance, dietary energetics, and carcass characteristics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Twenty-four Pelibuey × Katahdin lambs (36.4 ± 2.9 kg initial weight) were used in a 77 d feeding trial in a randomized complete block design to evaluate the influence of a standardized synbiotic-glyconutrient combination (GLY) on growth performance, dietary energetic, and carcass characteristics of lambs finished during a period of high ambient temperature. Dietary treatments consisted of a high-energy basal diet supplemented (% of diet dry matter basis) with 0% versus 0.4% GLY. Throughout the study, the average temperature humidity index (THI) was 76.23, corresponding to the “alert” range, but daily maximum THI exceeded 80 for 2 to 6 h of each day of the 77 d study. Daily GLY intake averaged 0.10 g GLY·kg−1 live weight. Supplemental GLY increased (P = 0.04) daily water intake, but dry matter intake was not affected. Supplemental GLY increased (P < 0.03) initial 56-d, and overall (77-d) average daily gain, gain efficiency and estimated dietary net energy. Lambs fed GLY had greater (P ≤ 0.05) hot carcass weight and fat thickness, and decreased (P = 0.02) kidney-pelvic-heart fat. Supplemental GLY did not affect (P ≥ 0.16) shoulder tissue composition or relative weight of visceral mass. Synbiotic-glyconutrient combination improved growth performance, dietary energy, and carcass weight in lambs finished in high ambient temperatures. Enhancements in growth performance and dietary energetics were most appreciable during the first 56 d of the 77 d finishing period.
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) | 0.001 | 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".