MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1999930239 · doi:10.3382/ps.2010-01069

Production performance and nitrogen flow of Shaver White layers housed in enriched or conventional cage systems

2011· article· en· W1999930239 on OpenAlexafffund
M. Neijat, James D. House, W. Guenter, E. Kebreab

Bibliographic record

VenuePoultry Science · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Nutrition and Physiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersUniversity of Manitoba
KeywordsAnimal scienceCageFeed conversion ratioBody weightManureChemistryBiologyMathematicsEcologyEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite the large number of studies examining the impact of cage systems on Ca and P nutrition, data are limited on the N balance of hens when housed under different systems. To this end, an experiment was conducted to assess N balance, manure characteristics, and indices of the performance of laying hens housed in 2 distinct caging systems. A total of 4,836 commercial Shaver White hens were housed in either enriched (EC) or conventional (CC) cages (average floor space per bird of 643 and 468 cm(2), respectively) under semicontrolled environmental conditions. Enriched cages provided hens with a curtained nesting area, scratch pad, and perches. Birds in both systems were phase fed similar layer diets for 11 periods (4 wk each). Data, expressed on a hen basis, were analyzed as repeated measures using the mixed model procedure of SAS. Lower feed disappearance (P < 0.01; 92.5 vs. 95.0 ± 0.6 g/d, DM basis) and manure output (P < 0.01; 79.8 vs. 91.3 ± 1.2 g/d, as-is basis, and 27.0 vs. 28.1 ± 0.2 g/d, DM basis) were observed in birds housed in EC compared with CC, respectively. Manure DM was 34.1 and 31.0 ± 0.3% for EC and CC, respectively. Egg production, feed conversion ratio, BW, egg weight, and egg mass were not significantly different between the 2 systems. Overall egg N output decreased with age for both cage systems and was not significantly different between the systems. Although no difference was observed in the overall manure N excretion (1.94 and 1.96 ± 0.02 g/d for EC and CC, respectively), hens housed in CC had a significantly (P < 0.05) higher N balance compared with those in the EC system (85.0 vs. 30.2 ± 13.6 mg/d, respectively), which could potentially be explained by a higher (P < 0.05) manure N excretion in the EC at the later stages of production. The current data provide estimates of the efficiency of N utilization in laying hens housed under different housing conditions.

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)0.000
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.462
Threshold uncertainty score0.150

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.173 · 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

Citations26
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePoultry ScienceSame topicAnimal Nutrition and PhysiologyFrench-language works237,207