Laying hens behave differently in artificially and naturally sourced ammoniated environments
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Laying hens are chronically exposed to high levels of ammonia (NH3), one of the most abundant aerial pollutants in poultry houses. Tests for aversion to NH3 in laying hens have used artificially sourced NH3/air mixtures (i.e., from a gas cylinder) showing that birds prefer fresh air to NH3. However, artificially sourced NH3/air mixtures may not accurately reflect barn air conditions, where manure emits a variety of gases. Herein, we investigated whether laying hens differentiate between artificially and naturally sourced NH3/air mixtures and how exposure to NH3 affects foraging and aversive behavior. A total of 20 laying hens was exposed to artificially sourced [A] (from an anhydrous NH3 cylinder) and naturally sourced [N] (from conspecific laying hen excreta) gas mixtures. Hens were exposed to A and N mixtures with NH3 concentrations of 25 and 45 ppm, as well as fresh air [FA]. During the experiment, all birds were exposed to each treatment 3 times using a custom-built polycarbonate chamber, containing a foraging area (containing raisins, mealworms, and feed mix) and a gas delivery system. All testing sessions were video recorded, analyzed with INTERACT® software, and subjected to a GLIMMIX procedure in SAS. Our results showed that the laying hens spent less time foraging overall (P < 0.001) and were slower to commence foraging (P = 0.004) in ammoniated environments compared to the fresh air. Laying hens were more likely to forage for a longer time (with fewer interruptions) in N than in A treatments (P < 0.001). Laying hens also reacted with greater aversion towards treatment A compared to treatment N (P < 0.001). These findings suggest that the laying hens of our study preferred fresh to ammoniated air and that they behaved differently in artificially and naturally sourced NH3/air mixtures, possibly due to the presence of familiar stimuli from the excreta. These findings have implications for new developments in methodological approaches for behavioral testing and for recommendations regarding NH3 levels inside poultry barns.
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 | 0.001 | 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".