The Effects of a Novel Bacillus subtilis DFM (BS-9) on Growth Performance, Indices of Intestinal Health, and Cecal Microbial Composition in Broiler Chickens Challenged with Eimeria
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Probiotics or direct-fed microbials (DFM) are alternatives to antibiotic growth promoters (AGP) in poultry production. However, there is limited information on their role in birds subjected to an enteric pathogen challenge. Herein are the investigations of Bacillus subtilis (BS-9) DFM on the growth performance and intestinal histomorphology (Chapter 3; Experiment 1) and on cecal microflora activity (Chapter 4; Experiment 1 & 2) in Ross x Ross 708 broiler chickens subjected to an Eimeria challenge. The DFM improved body weight, weight gain, and intestinal surface area but not feed conversion ratio (FCR). However, DFM birds had similar FCR to non-challenge control due to increased feed intake (FI), reduced members of Clostridiales, and altered SCFA production. The DFM effect on members of Firmicutes, particularly from order Clostridiales, was interactive, with the largest reduction in challenged DFM birds. Overall, DFM mitigated the adverse effects of an Eimeria challenge, suggesting potential for modulating the gut microbiota.
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".