ArticlePoultry science2026
Optimization of metabolizable energy prediction models for maize in laying hens by incorporating anti-nutritional factors.
Article in Poultry science, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to improve the prediction of AME and AMEn of maize for laying hens by evaluating the contribution of anti-nutritional factors (ANF) as predictor variables. Prediction models were developed using two sets of independent variables: a nutrient-only set (starch, crude protein, and ether extract; IVC1) and an extended set additionally including ANF (crude fiber, total arabinoxylan, ash and phytic acid; IVC2). Five algorithms (Linear Regression, Ridge, LASSO, Elastic Net, and Random Forest, RF) were trained with Bayesian hyperparameter optimization and evaluated using repeated nested cross-validation (3 × 10-fold) to obtain unbiased performance estimates. With nutrient-only inputs, RF achieved the highest accuracy, with R²_CV values of 0.645 for AME and 0.669 for AMEn, and RMSE_CV values of 22.9 and 21.3 kcal/kg DM, respectively. Including ANF further improved RF performance to R²_CV = 0.748 (RMSE_CV = 19.1 kcal/kg DM) for AME and R²_CV = 0.758 (RMSE_CV = 18.1 kcal/kg DM) for AMEn. Wilcoxon signed-rank tests confirmed that the improvements from IVC1 to IVC2 were consistent for all algorithms (P < 0.001). In conclusion, incorporating ANF as predictor variables substantially improves the prediction of maize AME and AMEn for laying hens beyond conventional nutrient composition. Among the tested algorithms, RF combined with Bayesian hyperparameter optimization and repeated nested cross-validation provided the most accurate and robust models.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.