Basing Turkey Lighting Programs on Broiler Research: A Good Idea? A Comparison of 18 Daylength Effects on Broiler and Turkey Welfare
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Daylength used as a management tool has powerful implications on the welfare of both broilers and turkeys. Near-constant light results in many detrimental impacts, including lack of behavioural rhythms and circadian melatonin rhythms. Both are suggestive that sleep fragmentation could result in birds reared on long photoperiods, which can lead to the same negative health and physiological responses as total sleep deprivation. An indirect comparison of the welfare implications of graded levels of daylength on broilers and turkeys clearly indicate that long daylengths depress welfare by increasing mortality, reducing mobility, increasing ocular pathologies and changing behaviour in both species. Furthermore, long daylengths change melatonin secretion patterns and eliminate behavioural and melatonin circadian rhythms, which were measured in broilers in these works. However, feather pecking in turkeys was reduced when birds were exposed to long daylengths. Exactly how much darkness should be included in a management program to maximize welfare will depend on the species, the age of marketing, and in turkeys, bird gender.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".