Genetic analysis of survival and fitness in turkeys with multiple-trait animal models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Genetic parameters for production, survival, and structural fitness traits recorded in pedigreed turkey sire and dam parental lines from a nucleus breeding program were estimated with multiple-trait animal models. Survival and conformation traits were scored in binary terms of health, where 0 = died or affected, and 1 = survived or healthy. Walking ability at 20 wk was subjectively scored from 1 (poor) to 6 (excellent). Body weights and egg production displayed moderate heritability (h(2) = 0.18 to 0.35). Early survival (to 3 wk) displayed low heritability (h(2) = 0.02 and 0.04 for the dam and sire lines, respectively). Late survival (3 to 23 wk) and longevity (age at death or cull) had low to moderate heritability (h(2) = 0.12 to 0.14). Walking ability had moderate heritability (h(2) = 0.26, 0.25). Leg structure health displayed low heritability (h(2) = 0.08), as did hip structure, foot, and skin health (h(2) ≤ 0.02). Crop health displayed moderate heritability (h(2) = 0.12). Walking ability, hip and leg structures, footpad, and breast skin health had negative genetic correlations with BW (r(G) = -0.50 to -0.23). Egg production had moderate positive genetic correlation with late survival (r(G) = 0.61). Genetic correlations between early and late survival were close to zero (r(G) = 0.10 and 0.03 for the dam and sire lines, respectively). Walking ability had high positive genetic correlations with late survival, longevity, hip structure, and leg structure in both lines (r(G) = 0.51 to 0.91). These genetic parameters indicate that unchecked selection for growth could decrease survival, walking ability, and hip, leg, footpad, and skin health in turkeys. However, index selection should be effective at improving fitness, survival, and growth simultaneously in commercial turkey lines. Walking ability should be a good indicator trait for selection to improve overall late survival and hip and leg health in turkeys.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".