MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2084860895 · doi:10.1093/ps/86.10.2267

Reproductive Efficiency and Metabolism of Female Broiler Breeders as Affected by Genotype, Feed Allocation, and Age at Photostimulation. 2. Sexual Maturation

2007· article· en· W2084860895 on OpenAlexafffund
R.A. Renema, F.E. Robinson, M.J. Zuidhof

Bibliographic record

VenuePoultry Science · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Nutrition and Physiology
Canadian institutionsAgriculture Food and Rural DevelopmentUniversity of Alberta
FundersNational Chung-Hsing UniversityUniversity of Alberta
KeywordsPhotostimulationBroilerBiologyGenotypeAnimal scienceSexual maturityEndocrinologyGeneticsGeneBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A 3 x 4 x 2 factorial design trial was conducted to determine the effect of 3 broiler breeder strains, 4 target BW profiles, and 2 photostimulation ages on sexual maturation traits. A total of 560 pullets from each strain (Hubbard Hi-Y, Ross 508, and Ross 708) were housed in 24 pens. The BW profiles diverged at 4 wk and subsequently converged at 32 wk of age as follows: standard (approximate mean target BW profile of the 3 strains), low (12-wk BW target = 25% lower than standard followed by rapid gain to 32 wk), moderate (12-wk BW target = 150% of standard followed by lower rate of gain to 32 wk), and high (12-wk BW target = 200% of standard followed by minimal growth to 32 wk). Birds were photostimulated at 18 (18WK) or 22 (22WK) wk. Eight birds per interaction (n = 192) were killed and dissected at sexual maturity (first oviposition). Body weight profile affected timing of sexual maturity with the 18WK but not the 22WK treatment. There was no effect of BW profile on initial egg weight. Mean BW at sexual maturity was 3.40, 3.21, 3.01, and 2.84 kg for high, moderate, standard, and low birds, respectively. This affected shank and keel length, indicating differences in frame size. Ovary weight at sexual maturity was 6 g heavier in the low treatment (55 g) compared with other BW profiles. This was related to recent feeding level, which was highest at sexual maturity in the low treatment. Arrangement of ovarian large yellow follicles (LYF) changed with photostimulation age. Birds that were photostimulated at 18WK had 1.33 LYF hierarchies, compared with 1.22 in 22WK birds. The 18WK-high birds had increased excess LYF production (55% paired) compared with other BW profiles, whereas both small yellow follicle number and atresia were increased. Feeding profiles affected growth and conformational traits, with little effect on reproductive morphology at sexual maturity.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.951
Threshold uncertainty score0.239

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations76
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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