The genetic parameters of feed efficiency and its component traits in the turkey (Meleagris gallopavo)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Residual feed intake (RFI) and feed conversion ratio (FCR) can be incorporated into a breeding program as traits to select for feed efficiency. Alternatively, the direct measures used to calculate RFI and FCR can be analyzed to determine the underlying variation in the traits that impact overall efficiency. These constituent traits can then be appropriately weighted in an index to achieve genetic gain. To investigate feed efficiency in the turkey, feed intake and weight gain were measured on male primary breeder line turkeys housed in individual feeding cages from 15 to 19 weeks of age. The FCR and RFI showed moderate heritability values of 0.16 and 0.21, respectively. Feed intake, body weight, and weight gain were also moderately heritable (0.25, 0.35, and 0.18, respectively). Weight gain was negatively correlated to feed conversion ratio and was not genetically correlated to RFI. Body weight had a small and positive genetic correlation to RFI (0.09) and FCR (0.12). Feed intake was positively genetically correlated to RFI (0.62); however, there was no genetic correlation between feed intake and FCR. These estimates of heritability and the genetic correlations can be used in the development of an index to improve feed efficiency and reduce the cost of production.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".