Effects of Genetic Selection on Behavioral Profiles of Single Comb White Leghorn Hens Through Two Production Cycles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Four layer genetic stocks consisting of 3 Ottawa control strains (5, 7, and 10) and a commercial laying stock (CCS) were utilized to evaluate potential changes in behavioral profiles due to the effects of genetic selection through 2 production cycles. The Ottawa strains were started as random bred strains from the crosses of several popular commercial layers in 1950, 1959, and 1972, and the commercial strain used herein was from calendar year 1993, and its ancestors were involved in the formation of all of the random bred strains. The behavior study utilized 2 replicates from each strain that contained 4 cages, 6 hens/cage, for a total of 192 hens. Behavioral observations were recorded on 2 consecutive days beginning at 22 wk of age and every 28 d thereafter during the first production cycle, the molt period, and the second production cycle through 90 wk of age and periodic feather and Hansen's test scores recorded. Behavior profiles were similar between the control strains and the CCS, indicating that long-term genetic selection by commercial egg-type breeding firms to enhance production parameters has had no impact on laying strain behavior patterns. Appetitive behaviors were not affected by strain. During the molt, hens had reduced (P < 0.05) feeding and drinking frequencies in comparison with those observed during the first and second cycles. The data indicated that hens pecked inedible objects at a greater (P < 0.0001) frequency during the first cycle and molt than during the second cycle. Fearfulness scores were only influenced by production phase with the molt having the highest (P < 0.01) score of 3.46. Strain or production phase did not influence the frequency of aggressive and submissive acts.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".