Evaluation of the bacterial community and intestinal development of different genetic lines of chickens
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The gastrointestinal tract (GIT) of each animal species provides a unique niche for specialized intestinal bacterial communities to thrive, and in poultry this is no exception. However, little is known about how the bacterial community varies among these different genetic lines of chickens, especially of those with various growth rates. Therefore, an experiment was conducted to observe and evaluate the changes in the bacterial community and GIT development of a modern multipurpose strain, high-yield strain, and a historic strain, Athens Canadian Random Bred (ACR), of broilers. All birds were fed a standard nonmedicated corn-soybean meal broiler starter diet ad libitum from 0 to 35 d of age. Intestinal measurements and bacterial analysis of the ileum were conducted at 4, 8, 14, 21, and 35 d of age. Bacterial DNA was isolated from the digesta, and the distribution of bacterial 16S rRNA sequence polymorphisms was analyzed by a combination of denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis and terminal restriction fragment length polymorphisms. The multipurpose chicks performed the best from 0 to 14 d of age; however, overall performance was similar for the multipurpose and the high-yield broilers. The ACR birds had the poorest performance at all periods measured. The overall relative weight of the jejunum and ileum was not different between the 3 genetic lines, but the ACR birds had the longest relative jejunum and ileum lengths. Furthermore, the multipurpose birds had the longest villi height, whereas the ACR birds had the shortest villi height in the jejunum and ileum at all measuring periods. Based on denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis, the multipurpose and high-yield broilers had similar bacterial communities at all ages. Regardless of the genetic line of broiler, the bacterial community changed with age. Performance, GIT measurements, and bacterial community of the ACR differed compared with the modern broilers. The results indicate that the different genetic lines of broilers have varying rates of intestinal development, which may affect performance and the bacterial community.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".