Performance of Broilers Fed Limited Quantities of Feed or Nutrients During Seven to Fourteen Days of Age
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Three experiments were conducted with male broilers to study the effects of early life undernutrition. In all studies, treatments were represented by three or four replicate floor pens, each containing 30 to 40 birds. In Experiment 1, broilers were fed at 0.75 kcal ME/gBW0.67 for 4 d, 1.5 kcal ME/gBW0.67 for 5 d or 2.25 kcal ME/gBW0.67 for 6 d, all imposed beginning at 6 d of age. Birds were smaller following feed restriction (P < 0.01) although growth compensation occurred, and at 49 d all restricted birds were heavier (P < 0.01) than full-fed control birds. Improved growth was associated with improved feed conversion (P < 0.01), although carcass composition was unchanged. In a second study, birds were fed at 0.75 kcal ME/gBW0.67 for 3, 4, or 5 d, starting at either 4, 7, or 10 d of age. When feed restriction was applied early, or for shorter periods of time, growth compensation occurred (P > 0.05). With other more severe feed restriction, birds were smaller (P < 0.05) at 49 d compared to controls. Feed conversion was improved following prior feed restriction (P < 0.01, 0 to 49 d). In a third trial, broilers were fed a starter diet diluted with 50% oat hulls. Birds failed to consume enough of this diluted feed, and so were initially smaller. However 49-d weight was not affected (P > 0.05). When periods of 24-h feed withdrawal were imposed in conjunction with the diluted diets, birds were underweight at 49 d. It is concluded that physical feed restriction at 0.75 to 1.5 kcal ME/gBW0.67 imposed for 3 to 4 d in the second week of life currently presents the best option as a means of controlling broiler growth so as to improve feed efficiency.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".