MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2093295013 · doi:10.1017/s0021859605004880

A comparative evaluation of functions for describing the relationship between live-weight gain and metabolizable energy intake in turkeys

2004· article· en· W2093295013 on OpenAlexaff
H. Darmani Kuhi, E. Kebreab, Secundino López, J. France

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Agricultural Science · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Nutrition and Physiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGompertz functionMathematicsEnergy balanceHyperbolaEnergy (signal processing)Animal scienceWeight gainBody weightParameterized complexityEnergy requirementStatisticsApplied mathematicsBiologyEcologyRegressionCombinatoricsEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The suitability of models specifically re-parameterized for analyzing energy balance data relating metabolizable energy intake to growth rate has recently been investigated in male broilers. In this study, the more adequate of those models was applied to growing turkeys to provide estimates of their energy needs for maintenance and growth. Three functional forms were used. They were: two equations representing diminishing returns behaviour (monomolecular and rectangular hyperbola); and one equation describing smooth sigmoidal behaviour with a fixed point of inflexion (Gompertz). The models estimated the metabolizable energy requirement for maintenance in turkeys to be 359–415 kJ/kg of live-weight/day. The predicted values of average net energy requirement for producing 1 g of gain in live-weight, between 1 and 4 times maintenance, varied from 8·7 to 10·9 kJ. These results and those previously reported for broilers are a basis for accepting the general validity of these models.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.211
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.092 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations15
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Agricultural ScienceSame topicAnimal Nutrition and PhysiologyFrench-language works237,207