Whole blood chemiluminescence response in broiler chickens on different experimental diets and challenged with<i>Clostridium perfringens</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
UNLABELLED: 1. OBJECTIVES: To validate the whole blood chemiluminescence (WBCL) assay in chickens, a simple and rapid method of measuring production of reactive oxygen species by circulating polymorphonuclear (PMN) leukocytes. To determine the physiological response and innate immune response associated with oral challenge with Clostridium perfringens in broiler chickens under different nutritional conditions. 2. In Experiment 1, birds were orally challenged with C. perfringens 1. type A or sham-challenged saline on days 14-21 post-hatch and fed protein-balanced diets containing 160 or 180 g crude protein/kg and 0.98 or 1.75% glycine in a 2 x 2 x 2 factorial arrangement of treatments. 2. Challenged birds had higher WBCL responses and more severe intestinal lesions than unchallenged birds. Birds fed diets containing 1.75% glycine had more intestinal lesions than those fed 0.98% glycine. 3. In Experiment 2 birds were fed protein-balanced diets containing 0.76, 2.10, 3.43 or 4.77% glycine. The birds fed 0.76% glycine diet had lower WBCL responses compared to birds fed the other three diets. Intestinal lesions were worse in the birds fed the highest, 4.77% glycine diet than in those fed the 0.76 or 2.10% glycine diets. 4. We conclude that the WBCL assay is a practical and sensitive means of assessing innate immune function in birds. The results suggest that both bacterial challenge and glycine content of chickens' diet influence their lesion scores and innate immune function.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".