Pathogenesis of Ascites in Broilers Raised at Low Altitude: Aetiological Considerations Based on Echocardiographic Findings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study reports novel insight into the aetiology of pulmonary hypertension and ascites in broiler chickens. The scope of measurements was focused on anatomical and functional parameters, and blood flow patterns in leghorns (resistant to ascites), fast-growing broilers (susceptible to ascites), broilers developing ascites, and ascitic broilers evaluated in vivo using echocardiography, and further examined in the context of postmortem findings. Both, in vivo observed features and postmortem findings, showed clear differences between broilers and leghorns, and between normal and ascitic broilers. Abnormalities in the heart chamber geometry and blood flow patterns were detected upon echocardiographic examination in all ascitic broilers. Right and left atrio-ventricular (AV) valve regurgitation were common findings in ascitic broilers and some apparently normal broilers, with left AV valve insufficiency being a predominant feature with respect to degree and frequency of occurrence. Blood flow disturbances were not detected in leghorns. Left ventricular fractional shortening (functional parameter) was considerably reduced (P < 0.01) in ascitic birds (mean: 21.7 +/- 2.0 SE) in comparison with normal broilers (mean: 39.1 +/- 3.6 SE), or leghorns (mean: 43.3 +/- 2.4 SE). The presented findings indicate that pathological and functional changes in the left ventricle and atrium play a significant role in the pathogenesis of ascites in broilers. Severe dilation of the left atrium and pulmonary veins seen on postmortem examination, as well as regurgitant blood flow in the left atrium, demonstrated by Doppler study in ascitic birds, provide evidence that chronically elevated pressure in the left atrium is involved in the aetiology of pulmonary hypertension and ascites in fast-growing broilers.
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".