Influence of Dietary Protease on Growth Performance and Carcass Yield of Indian River Meat Broiler Chickens
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of the present study was to evaluate the effect of a multi-component dietary protease complex on the growth performance and carcass yields of commercial broiler chickens. A total of 630 Indian River broiler DOCs were considered and assigned to five dietary treatments namely: 1) Positive control (PC), a standard diet with no supplemental protease, 2) Negative control (NC), a diet similar to PC but reduced in CP, digestible EAA, and ME based on supplier’s nutrient matrix recommendation, 3) PC+125 ppm protease (PC+125), 4) NC+125 ppm protease (NC+125), and 5) NC+200 ppm protease (NC+200). The birds were fed experimental diets for 28 days. Body weight (BW), body weight gain (BWG), feed intake (FI), feed conversion ratio (FCR), and survival rate were recorded weekly. On day 28, three birds per treatment were sacrificed for carcass yield analysis. FI was similar among the treatment groups except in the 2nd week where broilers fed PC+125, NC+125, and NC+200 diets had significantly higher (P<0.05) FI than those fed the PC diet. In terms of BW and BWG, there were no differences among the treatment groups at 1st and 2nd weeks, however, at 3rd and 4th weeks, broilers fed the PC+125, NC+125, and NC+200 diets were significantly heavier (P<0.05) than those fed the PC and NC diets. A similar trend was also observed in FCR. Among the carcass yield parameters, the percentage weights of thigh, breast, and heart in birds fed the NC+200 diet were significantly increased (P<0.05) as compared to those fed the NC diet, while results for PC, PC+125, and NC+125 were intermediate between the two treatment groups. Overall, the results of present study demonstrated that the supplementation of protease complex either on a standard or reduced diet may improve the overall production performance of commercial broiler chickens and offers benefits on certain aspects of carcass yield.
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) | 0.000 | 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".