The influence of genetic background versus commercial breeding programs on chicken immunocompetence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Immunocompetence of livestock plays an important role in farm profitability because it directly affects health maintenance. Genetics significantly influences the immune system, and the genotypic structure of modern fast-growing chickens has been changed, particularly after decades of breeding for higher production. Therefore, this study was designed to help determine if intensive breeding programs have adversely affected immunocompetence or whether the immune response profiles are controlled to greater extent by genetic background. Thus, 3 indigenous chicken populations from different genetic backgrounds and 2 globally available modern broiler strains, Ross 308 and Cobb 500, were evaluated for various aspects of immune response. These included antibody responses against sheep red blood cells and Brucella abortus antigen, as well as some aspects of cell-mediated immunocompetence by toe web swelling test and in vitro blood mononuclear cell proliferation. Significant differences (P < 0.05) in antibody responses to both antigens and cellular proliferation were observed among populations but not consistently between modern commercial strains versus the indigenous populations. In fact, the immune response profiles of Cobb 500 were similar to the indigenous populations, but varied compared with the other commercial strain. In addition, considerable variation was recorded between indigenous populations for all responses measured in this study. The results of this study suggest that the variation observed in immune responses between these strains of chickens is most likely due to differences in the genetic background between each strain of chicken rather than by commercial selection programs for high 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 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".