Light intensity can influence plasma FSH and age at sexual maturity in domestic pullets
Bibliographic record
Abstract
1. Shaver White and ISA Brown pullets were reared to 140 d in cage groups of 8 on a 10-h photoperiod of incandescent light and maintained at an illuminance of 3 or 25 lux, or transferred from 3 to 25 lux or from 25 to 3 lux at 63 or 112 d of age. 2. Plasma follicle stimulating hormone (FSH) concentration at 63 and 112 d was higher in both breeds for pullets maintained at an illuminance of 25 lux compared with 3 lux. After 2-4 d, and relative to constant-illuminance controls, plasma FSH increased significantly for ISA Brown transferred from 3 to 25 lux at 63 d and for Shaver White transferred at 112 d. Irrespective of genotype, plasma FSH for pullets given a decrease in illuminance at 63 or 112 d showed a tendency for less change than did constant-illuminance controls. 3. There was no significant difference in sexual maturity for ISA Brown maintained on 3 or 25 lux, but Shaver White pullets exposed to constant 3 lux matured later than those maintained on 25 lux. Shaver White matured later following an increase from 3 to 25 lux at 63 and 112 d, and earlier subsequent to a decrease from 25 to 3 lux at 112 d. ISA Brown pullets were not significantly affected by a change in illuminance at 63 or 112 d, though their responses were in the same direction as Shaver White. 4. Changes in plasma FSH in the 2- to 4-d period following a change in illuminance at 63 or 112 d were not significantly correlated with sexual maturity.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".