MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2140476728 · doi:10.3382/japr.2011-00434

Application of the law of diminishing returns to partitioning metabolizable energy and crude protein intake between maintenance and growth in egg-type pullets

2012· article· en· W2140476728 on OpenAlexaff
H. Darmani Kuhi, E. Kebreab, J. France

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Applied Poultry Research · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Nutrition and Physiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInterpretabilityBroilerNutrientBiologyAnimal scienceBiotechnologyComputer scienceEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Experiments designed to investigate the effect of dietary nutrient concentrations on the growth and development of pullets are relatively long term and expensive to conduct. As the cost of research increases, mathematical models become valuable tools to answer research and development questions. Modeling growth curves allows nutritionists and poultry researchers to predict dynamic or daily nutrient needs more adequately than using fixed requirements. The potential and validity of a specially reparameterized monomolecular model to partition nutrient intakes between requirements for maintenance and growth was previously demonstrated in relation to ruminants, pigs, chickens, turkeys, and broiler breeder pullets. In the current study, the model was evaluated for its ability to estimate ME and CP requirements for maintenance and growth in egg-type pullets. On the basis of the results of this study, along with those previously reported for chickens, turkeys, and broiler breeder pullets, this model is advantageous because it can predict the magnitude and direction of responses of growing poultry to dietary ME and CP intakes without requiring initial assumptions. The model also has the advantage of biological interpretability of the parameter estimates. One of the main consequences of this interpretability is that the results from several experiments can be pooled to obtain the best estimates of the response coefficients.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.052
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.243 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Applied Poultry ResearchSame topicAnimal Nutrition and PhysiologyFrench-language works237,207