Effect of light intensity on broiler production, processing characteristics, and welfare
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Manipulation of light intensity is an important management tool affecting broiler production and well being. Despite considerable research on light intensity, there is still a debate on the optimum level to be used for intensively housed broilers. Two trials were conducted with the objective of investigating the effect of light intensity, within the practical levels at confinement barns (1, 10, 20, and 40 lx), on production, processing characteristics, and welfare of broilers raised to 35 d of age. Each light intensity treatment was replicated in 2 environmentally controlled rooms in each trial with 950 Ross × Ross 308 chicks per room. Data were analyzed as a randomized complete block design with trial serving as a block. All chicks were exposed to 40 lx of light intensity and 23 h of light for the first 7 d followed by treatment light intensity and 17 h of day length thereafter. Body weight and feed consumption were determined at 7, 14, and 35 d of age. At the end of each trial, 60 birds per treatment were processed to determine the detailed meat yield. Skeletal and footpad and ocular health were monitored at 31 and 32 d of age, respectively. Body weight, feed consumption, feed:gain ratio, and mortality were unaffected by light intensity. Carcass, thigh, and drum yield as a percentage of live weight decreased linearly with increasing light intensity. The 1 lx treatment resulted in heavier wings as a percentage of live weight. Light intensity had no effect on skeletal health, but ulcerative footpad lesions decreased linearly with increasing light intensity. Birds exposed to the 1 lx treatment had heavier and larger eyes. In conclusion, light intensity did not affect broiler production and mortality but did affect carcass characteristics. The 1 lx light intensity treatment had a negative effect on broiler welfare as demonstrated by increased ulcerative footpad lesions and eye size.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".