Growth performance and body composition of Eimeria-infected broiler fed berry pomaces and a Limosilactobacillus reuteri isolate
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the present study, a Limosilactobacillus reuteri strain isolated from chicken ceca alone or in combination with wild blueberry and American cranberry pomaces were evaluated for their effects on growth performance and body composition in Eimeria -infected broiler. A total of 480 day-old Cobb500 male broilers were placed into 60 cages allocated to 8 treatments: T1: non-infected (NI); T2: Eimeria -infected (EI); T3: EI + anticoccidials (125 mg/kg zoalene for D0-D28, 60 mg/kg salinomycin for D28-D35); T4: EI + 1% blueberry pomace (BP); T5: EI + 1% cranberry pomace (CP); T6: EI + 10 8 CFU Limosilactobacillus reuteri (L. reuteri) ; T7: EI + 1% BP + L. reuteri ; T8: EI + 1% CP + L. reuteri . The EI was done by gavaging 2×10 5 oocysts of mixed Eimeria species ( E. acervulina, E. maxima and E. tenella ) . No significant differences were observed between treatments for body weight (BW) and average daily gain, however, berry pomaces reduced average daily feed intake ( P < 0.05) and the combination of L. reuteri with berry pomaces reduced feed conversion ratio in broilers when compared to control EI birds ( P < 0.05). Eimeria infection reduced both bone mineral content and density as well as fat content at D21 ( P < 0.05). At D21, the lowest total fat masses (% of BW) were observed in T4, T5 (pomaces) and T3 ( P < 0.05). In conclusion, these findings indicate that berry pomace alone or in combination with the studied L. reuteri isolate may be beneficial for growth performance and body composition in the broiler grower and finisher phases.
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".