Effects of early feeding of enzymatically treated yeast on growth performance, organ weights, intestinal histomorphology, and ceca microbial metabolites in broiler chickens subjected to Eimeria challenge
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The study evaluated effects of early feeding of enzymatically treated yeast on growth performance and selected physiological responses in broiler chickens. A total of 480-day-old (male) Ross × Ross 708 broiler chicks were placed in 24 floor pens (20 birds per pen) and allocated to 2 diets (control vs. yeast) in a completely randomized block design (n = 12). Diets were formulated for a 5-phase feeding program: Pre-starter; d 0 to 6 Starter; d 7 to 15, Grower: d 16 to 28, Finisher 1; d 28 to 42 and Finisher 2; d 43 to 56. The yeast was applied in pre-starter and starter diets at 0.6 and 0.2%, respectively. Birds received a common diet from d 16 to 56. Feed intake (FI) and body weight (BW) were recorded by phase for calculation of BW gain (BWG) and FCR. On d 10, all birds received an oral dose of 25,000 E. acervullina and 5,000 E. maxima sporulated oocysts in 1 mL of sterile saline. On d 15 post-hatch, one bird per pen was sacrificed for organ weights (gizzard, small intestine, ceca, liver, spleen, liver, and bursa), jejunal tissues for histomorphology and ceca digesta for microbial activity. On d 56, one bird per pen was sacrificed for organs and breast weight. In pre-starter phase, yeast fed birds showed improved (P < 0.05) BWG and FCR than control fed birds. Combining pre-starter and starter phases, the FCR of yeast fed birds showed improved FCR (1.115 vs. 1.135; P < 0.05) than control. The overall BWG (d 0-56) was 3.920 and 3.962 kg/ bird and corresponding values for FCR were, 1.808 and 1.755, for the control and yeast, respectively. Diets had no (P > 0.05) effects on physiological responses evaluated on necropsied birds except that yeast birds had (P < 0.05) lighter bursa than control birds on d 15. The current data indicated that yeast could support growth in early life of broiler chickens, but these effects were not sustained after the transitioning birds to common grower and finisher diets.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".