MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4313644596 · doi:10.3389/fvets.2022.1067383

Yeast derivatives as a source of bioactive components in animal nutrition: A brief review

2023· review· en· W4313644596 on OpenAlexaff
Rob Patterson, Anna Rogiewicz, Elijah G. Kiarie, B.A. Slominski

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Veterinary Science · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicProbiotics and Fermented Foods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphUniversity of ManitobaCanadian Bio-Systems (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsYeastBiologyBiotechnologyContext (archaeology)LivestockComputational biologyBiochemical engineeringBiochemistryEcologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With a long history of inclusion within livestock feeding programs, yeast and their respective derivatives are well-understood from a nutritional perspective. Originally used as sources of highly digestible protein in young animal rations in order to offset the use of conventional protein sources such as soybean and fish meal, application strategies have expanded in recent years into non-nutritional uses for all animal categories. For the case of yeast derivatives, product streams coming from the downstream processing of nutritional yeast, the expansion in use cases across species groups has been driven by a greater understanding of the composition of each derivative along with deeper knowledge of mechanistic action of key functional components. From improving feed efficiency, to serving as alternatives to antibiotic growth promoters and supporting intestinal health and immunity while mitigating pathogen shedding, new use cases are driven by a recognition that yeast derivatives contain specific bioactive compounds that possess functional properties. This review will attempt to highlight key bioactive categories within industrially applicable yeast derivatives and provide context regarding identification and characterization and mechanisms of action related to efficacy within a range of experimental models.

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)0.001
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.977
Threshold uncertainty score0.513

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.106
GPT teacher head0.324
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 designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations43
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Veterinary ScienceSame topicProbiotics and Fermented FoodsFrench-language works237,207