Use of cinnamon and <i>Bacillus subtilis</i> probiotics in the diet of broiler chickens
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present study was carried out to evaluate the effect of cinnamon and Bacillus subtilis on the growth, meat characteristics, and lipid profiles of broiler chickens. In experiments 1 and 2, a total of 320 day-old broiler chicks were assigned to D1 (control), D2 (4 g cinnamon/kg), D3 (6 g cinnamon/kg), D4 (8 g cinnamon/kg) with four replicates, and D1 (control), D2 (0.4 g B. subtilis (BS)/kg), D3 (0.6 g BS/kg), D4 (0.8 g BS/kg), D5 (6 g cinnamon/kg) with three replicates, and 10 chicks/replication for 35 and 30 days, respectively. In experiment 1, no significant difference was observed among diets for growth and meat yield. However, test diets performed better than the control diet in terms of water-holding capacity of meat (WHCM), cooking loss of meat (CLM), blood lipids profiles (BLP), sensory quality score (SQS) ( p > 0.05), and flavor ( p < 0.05). In experiment 2, there was no significant difference among diets for growth, meat yield, WHCM, CLM, and BLP of the bird ( p > 0.05), except for SQS ( p < 0.001). Notwithstanding, the D5 tended to increase growth, meat yield, WHCM, and SQS, and decrease CLM and BLP. Thigh meat showed higher SQS than breast meat in both experiments. Therefore, the 6 g cinnamon/kg diet may be used for producing a safe, quality, and cost-effective broiler.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".