MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2055752023 · doi:10.3382/ps.2010-01122

Survey of egg producers on the introduction of alternative housing systems for laying hens in Flanders, Belgium

2011· article· en· W2055752023 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Frank Tuyttens, Bart Sonck, M. Staes, Suzy Van Gansbeke, Tom Van den Bogaert, Bart Ampe

Bibliographic record

VenuePoultry Science · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Nutrition and Physiology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFederaal Agentschap Voor de Veiligheid Van de Voedselketen
KeywordsContext (archaeology)European unionAgricultural scienceBusinessQuarter (Canadian coin)FlockFlemishAgricultural economicsGeographyEconomicsBiologyInternational tradeEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the context of the European Union ban on battery cages by 2012, a survey was conducted among Flemish egg producers (60% response rate, 140 completed questionnaires) about the introduction and opinion of alternative housing systems. Belgium appears to be among the countries in the European Union that are slower to adopt alternative housing. Belgium's egg industry is thus likely to undergo drastic changes to comply with the 2012 deadline. As of 2010, the battery cage was the dominant housing system (56% housing units, 67% hens), followed by floor housing (33% housing units, 15% hens) and aviary (10% housing units, 15% hens), whereas colony cages and furnished cages were extremely rare. Future- and market-oriented production was the most important reason for choosing a certain type of alternative system, although the importance of hen performance and amount of labor seemed to increase. A quarter of the producers with battery cages had detailed plans to convert to an alternative system (most planned to install aviaries, followed by colony cages, furnished cages, and floor housing) by 2012. Many older farmers indicated that they would stop farming, whereas others found it more profitable to delay the conversion as long as possible. Apart from hen welfare, producers expressed a negative opinion (relative to battery cages) about noncage systems and, to a lesser extent, furnished cages. However, users of alternative systems reported being quite satisfied, except for the amount of labor and hen health. The housing system had several effects on user satisfaction: positive effect of flock size, negative effect of experience with battery cages, and negative effect of outdoor area on hen health. Although not all opinions were supported by evidence, such surveys provide feedback about the success of alternative systems in practice. This information is valuable to further improve these systems and to producers who have yet to convert. Moreover, producer attitude may determine the extent to which legally imposed changes in husbandry environment result in the desired improvement of hen welfare in practice.

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)0.001
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 score0.642
Threshold uncertainty score0.406

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.118
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.150 · 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

Citations25
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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