MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2000824006 · doi:10.1093/ps/79.3.402

Heterophil to lymphocyte ratio and tonic immobility reactions to preslaughter handling in broiler chickens treated with ascorbic acid

2000· article· en· W2000824006 on OpenAlexaff
I. Zulkifli, M.T. Che Norma, Chen Chong, Teck Chwen Loh

Bibliographic record

VenuePoultry Science · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Nutrition and Physiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBroilerAscorbic acidAnimal scienceSterile waterLiterChemistryTonic (physiology)Leukocyte CountsLymphocyteInternal medicineMedicineBiologyFood science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Stress and fear responses were evaluated in broiler chicks that were pretreated for 24 h with 0 ppm (control) or 1,200 ppm of L-ascorbic acid (AA) in their drinking water. The birds were subsequently subjected to either upright handling (UH) or inverted (IH) handling for about 45 s. Heterophil (H) counts, lymphocyte (L) counts, and H/L ratios (H/L) ratios were determined immediately (T0) and at 20 h (T20) following the handling treatment. The H/L ratios were similar for both groups at T0, whereas 20 h after the handling treatment, AA-supplemented birds had lower ratios than controls, resulting in a significant water treatment x time of blood sampling interaction. Inverted handling had negligible effect on H/L ratios but augmented tonic immobility (TI) durations as compared with UH. Irrespective of handling procedure, supplemental AA reduced underlying fearfulness, as measured by TI reaction. Neither water treatment nor handling method had significant effect on number of attempts to induce TI.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.956
Threshold uncertainty score0.505

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.213 · 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

Citations85
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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