MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7082631511 · doi:10.1139/cjas-2025-0014

Dietary β-1,3-glucan supplementation in broilers with dextran sulfate sodium (DSS)-induced colitis: impact on growth performance, organ weight, meat quality, and intestinal health

2025· article· en· W7082631511 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Animal Science · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicX-ray Diffraction in Crystallography
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBroilerFeed conversion ratioBody weightSodiumDietary supplementWeight gainCompletely randomized design

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The study evaluated the effects of dietary β-1,3-glucan supplementation on growth performance, organ weight, meat quality, and intestinal health in broilers with dextran sulfate sodium (DSS)-induced colitis. Experiment 1, a total of 304 one-day-old Ross 308 male broiler chicks (average initial body weight: 43.06 ± 6.94 g) were randomly assigned to two treatments with 8 replications (19 birds per replication): CON (basal diet) and TRT1 (basal diet + 0.1% β-1,3-glucan). Supplementation of β-1,3-glucan significantly increased body weight gain (BWG) ( P < 0.05), while feed intake and feed conversion ratio remained unaffected. Breast muscle weight, pH, and water-holding capacity increased, and drip loss decreased ( P < 0.05). Experiment 2 also involved 304 Ross 308 male chicks with an initial BW of 42.03 ± 4.38 g. The chicks were assigned to two treatments with 8 replications (19 birds per replication): TRT1 (basal diet + 2.5% DSS) and TRT2 (basal diet + 2.5% DSS + 0.1% β-1,3-glucan). After 35 days, β-1,3-glucan supplementation significantly improved BWG ( P < 0.05) and intestinal length at both 18 and 35 days ( P < 0.05). The study concluded that dietary β-1,3-glucan supplementation enhanced growth performance, meat quality, and intestinal health in broilers.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.487
Threshold uncertainty score0.977

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.030
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.288 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Animal ScienceSame topicX-ray Diffraction in CrystallographyFrench-language works237,207