Chemical composition and standardized ileal amino acid digestibility of Manitoba soybean meal in broiler chickens
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aimed to evaluate the chemical composition and digestibility of expeller soybean meal (SBM) derived from Manitoba-grown soybean as a potential protein source for broiler chickens. The utilization of locally produced Manitoba SBM could offer a cost-effective and sustainable alternative to imported soybean meal. The standardized ileal amino acid digestibility (SIAAD) of Manitoba SBM was assessed through a digestibility study using a nitrogen-free diet (NFD). Three samples of Manitoba SBM and one sample of SBM from Ontario-grown seeds were analyzed and incorporated into diets as the sole source of nitrogen. Day-old Ross 308 chickens (n=320) were allocated to 64 cages with 5 birds per cage and fed a starter diet for 14 days. On day 15, the birds were randomly assigned to one of the five treatments, with 10 replicate cages per treatment, and stayed on trial for 5 days. The crude protein (CP) concentration of the Manitoba SBM samples ranged from 40.4-41.5% and the Ontario sample had a CP concentration of 47.9% on dry matter basis. The fat content of Manitoba and Ontario samples ranged from 10.6-11.3% and 9%, respectively. The total non-starch polysaccharides in the Manitoba and Ontario samples were 17.4-18% and 15.5%, respectively. Raffinose-family oligosaccharides were present at levels of 6.5- 8.7% in the Manitoba SBM samples and 6.2% in Ontario sample. The SIAAD of Manitoba SBM was similar to the control, except for histidine, methionine, and cysteine (P < 0.05) which were lower in two Manitoba samples. The mean standardized ileal CP digestibility of Manitoba SBM was 78.1%, compared to 81.1% for Ontario samples, and the difference was not statistically significant. The overall SIAAD values of Manitoba SBM were found to be lower than those reported in the literature for expeller-pressed SBM, explained by increased antinutritional factor content and potential differences in processing techniques. In conclusion, Manitoba SBM holds promise as a viable protein ingredient for poultry nutrition, however further studies are necessary to understand its full potential.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 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".