The effect of simulated cold weather transport on core body temperature and behavior of broilers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
During the winter in Western Canada, broilers are routinely transported in ambient temperatures ranging from 0°C to -40°C, yet there is little research in this area. This study examined the physiology and behavior of broilers undergoing simulated transport at typical Western Canadian winter temperatures. Groups of 15 broilers aged 32 to 33 d were exposed to an air stream regulated to -5, -10, or -15°C. Birds were placed into a typical transport drawer. Following baseline observations, the drawer was placed into a test chamber where cold air was drawn past the birds for 3 h. Three replications were conducted at each temperature. The birds adjusted their position within the drawer based upon the temperature distribution within the drawer. In comparison to the baseline period, exposing the birds to a cold air stream caused them to avoid the front plane (P = 0.003) which was the coldest area within the drawer. The birds did not adjust their usage of the middle (P = 0.308) and rear (P = 0.640) planes, because these were the warmer areas within the drawer. The total amount of space the birds occupied within the drawer did not decrease when exposed to the test chamber (P = 0.669). The core body temperature (CBT) did not vary and was within the known normal range during the normal (P = 0.528), pre-chamber (P = 0.060), and post-chamber (P = 0.285) periods. The CBT of the birds significantly decreased during the in-chamber period (P < 0.001) and then increased during the lairage period (P < 0.001). The shrink loss (P = 0.981) and amount of time to resume feed consumption (P = 0.357) were not affected by exposing the birds to temperatures of -5°C and colder. Exposing birds to temperatures of -5°C and colder had a negative effect on the CBT of the birds. However, the birds demonstrated behaviors which mitigated the negative effect that cold exposure could have on their CBT.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".