The value of anticoccidials for sustainable global poultry production
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Coccidiosis is a self-limiting disease that is universally present in poultry operations, causing extensive damage to the intestinal lining of the bird. Global economic losses from coccidiosis are estimated to be $3 billion per year. In-feed anticoccidial use has been the predominant form of coccidiosis control. However, due to widespread emergence of antimicrobial resistance, concerns have been raised regarding the safety of anticoccidials and the potential impact on human, animal, and environmental health. To investigate the benefits, risks, and alternatives to anticoccidial use, a comprehensive review of recent literature was conducted. Several live vaccines are available, which, when used in combination with anticoccidials, have been shown to help restore sensitivity of infective parasites. However, their use has been limited because of increased cost; increased susceptibility to bacterial enteritis; challenges with consistent application; and slow development of immunity. Various alternative feed products are available, but do not have a direct anticoccidial effect, and few studies have demonstrated consistent field efficacy of these products. Consumer and environmental safety of anticoccidials is monitored and assessed by governing bodies. Furthermore, there is a lack of current evidence to indicate that bacterial resistance poses a public health concern. The findings from this review indicate that in the absence of alternatives, poultry production is optimized by using anticoccidials, benefiting all three pillars of sustainability, including social (bird health, welfare, and food safety), economic (production efficiency), and environmental aspects.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 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".