MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2333588710 · doi:10.3382/ps/pew091

The epizootiology of Eimeria infections in commercial broiler chickens where anticoccidial drug programs were employed in six successive flocks to control coccidiosis

2016· article· en· W2333588710 on OpenAlexaff
H. D. Chapman, John R. Barta, Mian Abdul Hafeez, P. L. Matsler, T. Rathinam, Maurice Raccoursier

Bibliographic record

VenuePoultry Science · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicCoccidia and coccidiosis research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFlockEimeriaCoccidiosisBroilerVeterinary medicineBiologyEimeria acervulinaEpizootiologyLitterCoccidiaEimeria maximaCoccidiostatsAnimal scienceDeep litterParasite hostingMicrobiologyVirologyEcologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The course of natural Eimeria infections in 6 successive broiler flocks at a commercial farm comprising 4 houses, where different anticoccidial drug programs were employed, was studied by counting the number of oocysts in the litter at weekly intervals. The course of infection in all flocks followed a bell shaped curve in which oocyst numbers, initially low, increased to a peak ranging from 36 × 10(3) to 74 × 10(3) oocysts/g (OPG) of litter around 3 to 4 wk of age. Numbers subsequently declined to 3 × 10(3) to 15 × 10(3) OPG. Oocysts could be detected between flocks when birds were not present. Species of Eimeria identified included E. acervulina, E. maxima, and E. tenella Despite the presence of large numbers of oocysts in the litter, coccidial lesions were not observed in the intestines of the birds. The performance of broilers at the study site was comparable to that of other farms in the area where birds from the same settlement were reared to a similar age using the same drug programs. The results indicate the ubiquitous nature of Eimeria spp. infections in commercial broilers despite prophylactic medication.

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)0.001
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 score0.244
Threshold uncertainty score0.968

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.250 · 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

Citations52
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePoultry ScienceSame topicCoccidia and coccidiosis researchFrench-language works237,207