Structure and age-dependent development of the turkey liver: a comparative study of a highly selected meat-type and a wild-type turkey line
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this study the macroscopic and microscopic structure of the liver of a fast growing, meat-type turkey line (British United turkeys BUT Big 6, n=25) and a wild-type turkey line (Wild Canadian turkey, n=48) were compared at the age of 4, 8, 12, 16, and 20 wk. Because the growth plates of long bones were still detectable in the 20-week-old wild-type turkeys, indicating immaturity, a group of 8 wild-type turkeys at the age of 24 wk was included in the original scope of the study. Over the term of the study, the body and liver weights of birds from the meat-type turkey line increased at a faster rate than those of the wild-type turkey line. However, the relative liver weight of the meat-type turkeys declined (from 2.7 to 0.9%) to a greater extent than that of the wild-type turkeys (from 2.8 to 1.9%), suggesting a mismatch in development between muscle weights and liver weights of the meat-type turkeys. Signs of high levels of fat storage in the liver were detected in both lines but were greater in the wild-type turkey line, suggesting a better feed conversion by the extreme-genotype birds i.e., meat-type birds. For the first time, this study presents morphologic data on the structure and arrangement of the lymphatic tissue within the healthy turkey liver, describing two different types of lymphatic aggregations within the liver parenchyma, i.e., aggregations with and without fibrous capsules. Despite differences during development, both adult meat-type and adult wild-type turkeys had similar numbers of lymphatic aggregations.
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 | 0.001 | 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".