MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2936976037 · doi:10.3382/ps/pez224

A model of pre-pubertal broiler breeder estradiol-17β levels predicts advanced sexual maturation for birds with high body weight or short juvenile day-length exposure

2019· article· en· W2936976037 on OpenAlexafffund
S.A.S. van der Klein, Sheila Hadinia, F.E. Robinson, Grégoy Y. Bédécarrats, M.J. Zuidhof

Bibliographic record

VenuePoultry Science · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Nutrition and Physiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphUniversity of Alberta
FundersMinistry of Agriculture, Food and Rural AffairsAlberta Livestock and Meat AgencyOntario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural AffairsCanadian Poultry Research Council
KeywordsPhotostimulationGompertz functionAnimal sciencephotoperiodismBiologyEndocrinologyInternal medicineJuvenileSexual maturityBody weightInflection pointMedicineMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As broiler breeders face increased reproductive challenges specifically related to overfeeding, a clear understanding of the physiological effects of BW and rearing photoperiod on reproductive development is needed. The objective was to use mathematical models to compare plasma estradiol-17β (E2) concentration to characterize the effect of BW and rearing photoperiod on E2 levels. A 2 × 3 factorial arrangement of treatments was used. Hens (n = 180) were fed with a precision feeding system to allocate feed individually to achieve the breeder-recommended BW curve (Standard) or to a BW curve reaching the 21 wk target at 18 wk (High). Hens were on 8L:16D, 10L:14D, or 12L:12D photoschedules during rearing and were photostimulated at 21 wk. Age at first egg (AFE) was recorded. Plasma E2 levels were determined weekly between week 20 and 28. Two modified Gompertz models described E2 level as a function of (a) chronological or (b) physiological (relative to AFE) age. Timing of E2-inflection point was compared between models and treatments. Differences were reported as significant at P ≤ 0.05. The chronological age model inferred that High BW reduced the duration between the E2-inflection point and AFE, whereas the physiological age model inferred that High BW only reduced the duration between photostimulation and the E2-inflection point. Hens on the Standard BW treatment had a longer period between photostimulation and the E2-inflection point compared to hens on the High-BW treatment (11.03 vs. 1.50 wk, respectively, based on physiological age). Hens on the 12L:12D photoschedule had a longer period between photostimulation and the E2-inflection point compared to hens on the 8L:16D or 10L:14D photoschedule, both in the Standard and High BW (28.91 vs. 1.78 and 2.40 wk, 2.65 vs. 0.93 and 0.94 wk, respectively, based on physiological age). The described methodology and results provide quantitative insight into E2 dynamics and serves as a model for future endocrinological studies in poultry reproduction.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.965
Threshold uncertainty score0.262

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations5
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePoultry ScienceSame topicAnimal Nutrition and PhysiologyFrench-language works237,207