PSI-13 Allometric growth patterns in turkeys (Meleagris gallopavo) show no significant increase in total carcass meat yield
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The body composition of livestock has been shown to change over time. Generally, bone maturation occurs first, followed by muscle growth. The objective of this study was to evaluate growth patterns of the most economically significant carcass components (pectoralis major, pectoralis minor, thigh, drum, and rack) in a commercial strain of turkeys. Live body weights and carcass component weights were collected on 1688 toms and 1085 hens between 2012 and 2017. Toms and hens were slaughtered between 109–149 days and 91–114 days of age, respectively. Yield values were calculated for each carcass component as a percentage of the live body weight. Regression coefficients (b) were calculated by regressing yield values on the age of the animal at slaughter. P. major and P. minor yield increased with age, though at different rates, for both toms (b=0.120, P < 0.01 and 0.003, P < 0.01, respectively) and hens (b=0.089, P < 0.01 and 0.020, P < 0.01, respectively). Tom drum and rack yield decreased with age (b=-0.012, P < 0.01 and -0.104, P < 0.01, respectively). Hen drum yield also decreased with age (b=-0.018, P < 0.01), while hen rack yield was found to not be significant from zero. Toms and hens showed similar trends of increasing breast yield with age and an equal combined decline in other carcass component yields. Thus resulting in a small significant increase in hen carcass meat yield (b=0.080, P < 0.01) and no significant increase in tom carcass meat yield (b=0.005, P > 0.01) which were both expected to increase with age given expected body composition changes over time. Strong selection for breast meat yield and the observed negative correlations between breast muscle yield and thigh and drum yields are likely the cause of this trend. Further research should investigate the use of carcass meat yield or other carcass component yields in turkey breeding programs.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".