Influence of egg warming during storage and hypercapnic incubation on egg characteristics, embryonic development, hatchability, and chick quality
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Negative effects of prolonged egg storage on hatchability and chick quality may be caused by changes in the embryo or in the egg characteristics, or by both. The aim of this experiment was to investigate whether prestorage incubation (PSI), frequent warming during storage (FW), or hypercapnic incubation (HI) during the first 5 d of incubation affect egg characteristics, embryonic development, hatchability, and chick quality. The experiment had a 2 × 2 × 2 randomized design: PSI (yes-no), FW (yes-no), and HI (yes-no). All eggs were stored for 15 d at 16°C and 75% RH. On the second day after oviposition, half of the eggs were incubated for 7 h (PSI). During storage, half of the eggs were warmed 6 times for 30 min in water at 37.8°C (FW). During the first 5 d of incubation, the CO(2) concentration in the incubator was maintained between 0.70 and 0.80% (HI) or increased from 0.05 to 0.20% (control). Prestorage incubation and FW increased the stage of embryonic development and the number of viable embryonic cells, but these treatments did not have a pronounced effect on egg characteristics, hatchability, or chick quality. Hypercapnic incubation decreased total albumen pH, which was measured at 18, 42, 66, and 90 h of incubation, and the percentage of eggs classified as infertile (Δ = 1.2%). In contrast, HI retarded embryonic development, decreased hatchability of fertile eggs by 1.3%, but did not affect chick quality. We conclude that both PSI and FW did not improve hatchability and chick quality, although the stage of embryonic development and the number of viable embryonic cells increased due to the treatments. Hypercapnic incubation decreased total albumen pH, which may be related to the increased number of embryos that continued their development at the onset of incubation. Because HI retarded further embryonic development and decreased hatchability, long-term stored embryos were probably sensitive to the CO(2) concentration of 0.70 to 0.80% between 48 and 72 h of incubation.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".