Comparative responses of Lohmann Select Leghorn-lite and Shaver Heritage White Leghorn hens when fed diets containing fine and coarse oat hulls
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A standard commercial mash (control), or a mixture of control and fine (FOH) or coarse oat hulls (COH) at a ratio of 80:20 w/ w were fed to 57-week old Lohmann Select Leghorn-lite (LSL) and 44-week old Shavers Heritage White Leghorns (SHW) for 28 days. There was no ( P > 0.05) strain and diet interaction or diet effects on egg production indices (EP) and feed intake (FI). However, LSL hens had similar ( P > 0.05) FI but higher ( P > 0.05) EP than SHW. There was no strain and diet interaction observed on apparent retention of gross energy (ARGE) and gizzard weight ( P > 0.05). However, the control hens had higher ARGE, and lighter gizzards compared to oat hull-fed hens ( P < 0.01). In addition, COH hens had higher ARGE and heavier gizzards compared to FOH hens. The SHW hens exhibited greater jejunal crypt depth ( P = 0.011) compared to LSL hens. An interaction ( P = 0.041) between strain and diets on ceca digesta short chain fatty acids (SCFA) was such that oat hulls reduced SCFA in LSL but not in SHW hens. In conclusion, despite differences in age, relative to predecessors the modern hen is adaptable to ingestion of structural material rich insoluble fiber without negative impact on egg production and feed intake.
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".