MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2169135289 · doi:10.3382/ps.2013-03417

A survey of current ostrich handling and transport practices in North America with reference to ostrich welfare and transportation guidelines set up in other countries

2014· article· en· W2169135289 on OpenAlexaffabout
Masoumeh Bejaei, K.M. Cheng

Bibliographic record

VenuePoultry Science · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicAnimal Behavior and Welfare Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWelfareAgricultureEuropean unionAnimal welfareBusinessProduct (mathematics)GeographyEconomicsInternational tradeEcologyBiologyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Appropriate management of an ostrich's exposure to stressors during preslaughter handling and transport practices can improve its well-being and product quality. Because of the lack of information about ostrich farming and transportation in North America and lack of developed Codes of Practice for ratite transport in Canada and the United States, the first objective of our research was to identify current preslaughter handling and transport practices of the ostrich industry in Canada and the United States, and to identify potential welfare issues based on the current practices. The second objective of this research was to review ostrich transport welfare standards and guidelines from Australia, European Union, New Zealand, and South Africa to investigate if those guidelines are applicable to Canadian and American ostrich production systems. Preliminary producer interviews, on-farm visits, and literature review information sources were used to design a producer questionnaire that was used to survey producers by Internet and mail surveying methods to identify existing ostrich transport norms in Canada and the United States. Based on the results of our producer survey and review of the transport standards and guidelines, we conclude that following factors are potential ostrich handling and transport welfare issues in Canada and the United States: lack of scientific information about welfare of ostriches during handling and transport; unfamiliarity of handlers and birds with handling and transport practices; not considering birds' social bounds, sex, behavior, and physical state in mixing them during handling and transport process; lack of an established specific maximum water and feed withdrawal duration for ostrich transport in Canada and the United States; lack of a specific vehicle designed for ratite transportation in Canada and the United States considering different physical body characteristics of ostriches compared with other species; exposure of birds to natural light during transport inside the trailer; overcrowding; and long transportation in Canada and the United States. Results of this research will contribute toward developing Codes of Practice for preslaughter handling, transportation, and slaughter of ostriches in Canada and the United States.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.166
GPT teacher head0.407
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations15
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePoultry ScienceSame topicAnimal Behavior and Welfare StudiesFrench-language works237,207