MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2099505592 · doi:10.5539/jas.v4n6p160

Growth Characteristics of Six Reciprocal Crosses of Kenyan Indigenous Chicken

2012· article· en· W2099505592 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
J.M. Ndegwa, Roger Mead, P. Norrish, D. D. Shephered, C.W. Kimani, A.M. Wachira

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agricultural Science · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicLivestock and Poultry Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Reading
KeywordsSireFlockGompertz functionAnimal husbandryIndigenousKenyaStatisticsBiologyDemographyVeterinary medicineGeographyAnimal scienceMathematicsAgricultureEcologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A study was carried out at the poultry research unit of the Kenya Agricultural Research Institute, National Animal Husbandry Research Centre, Naivasha in 1993 and 1994, to investigate growth performance of six reciprocal crosses of indigenous chicken originating from the Taita, Nyeri and Kericho districts in Kenya. Six hundred mixed sex day old chicks were used. Feed and water were provided ad libitum and the birds weighed individually on weekly basis up to the age of 30 weeks. Non-linear regression model procedures of the statistical analysis system (SAS) were used in data analysis. The gompertz growth model was used in fitting the body weight data with three parameter estimates, A, B and K. A statistical analysis of residual variations was used to determine differences between fitted curves. There were significant differences in growth pattern among the reciprocal crosses of indigenous chicken and between male and female birds. There was a possible effect of the choice of dam or sire in a given combination. The Nyeri line seemed to perform potentially better as a dam for both male and female offspring. The Taita line on the other hand, seemed to potentially perform better as a sire and so was the Kericho line. Use of growth data beyond 20 weeks resulted in better expression of asymptotic nature of fitted curves. There is some potential for improvement of the performance among indigenous flocks by judicious cross breeding strategies.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.211 · 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

Citations10
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Agricultural ScienceSame topicLivestock and Poultry ManagementFrench-language works237,207