Effect of various monochromatic light-emitting diode colours on the behaviour and welfare of broiler chickens
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study was conducted to evaluate the effect of different monochromatic light-emitting diode colours on the behaviour and welfare of broiler chicks. A total of 750 one-day-old chicks were used and lighting was set up as follows: pure blue (PB, 440–450 nm), bright blue (460–470 nm), sky blue (480–490 nm), greenish blue (500–510 nm), and green (530–540), while fluorescent white (400–700 nm) was used as a control. Birds were placed into 30 independent light proof pens and each light treatment was replicated five times with 25 birds in each pen. Video was recorded and behaviour was evaluated twice per day and observed five consecutive days in a week. Broiler welfare was evaluated using the characteristics of gait score, tibia dyschondroplasia, tonic immobility duration, and heterophil:lymphocyte ratio. In results, sitting, walking, and ground pecking behaviour were influenced by the light colour from 0 to 7 d. Extending the rearing period from 8 to 21 d resulted in increased sitting behaviour and decreased walking and pecking behaviour in chicks in the PB treatment (P < 0.05). When the growth period was extended further (22–42 d), sitting behaviour increased when chicks were exposed to PB light (P < 0.05). The effect of light colour did not significantly influence welfare of broiler chicks. Thus, the present results suggest that PB light colour decreased broiler chickens movement and thus increased duration of sitting behaviour. These results would be helpful to choose light colour for broiler producers.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".