MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3118595527 · doi:10.1016/j.psj.2020.12.027

Centennial Review: Effects of vitamins A, D, E, and C on the chicken immune system

2021· review· en· W3118595527 on OpenAlexafffund
Bahram Shojadoost, Mohammadali Alizadeh, Raveendra R. Kulkarni, Jake Astill, Nitish Boodhoo, Shayan Sharif

Bibliographic record

VenuePoultry Science · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicVitamin C and Antioxidants Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaOntario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural AffairsCanadian Poultry Research Council
KeywordsImmune systemBiologyAntioxidantAcquired immune systemImmunityAntimicrobialImmunologyMicrobiologyBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Vitamins are nutritional elements which are necessary for essential activities such as development, growth, and metabolism of cells. In addition to these conventional functions, vitamins A, D, E, and C have vital roles in normal function of the immune system as their deficiency is known to impair innate and adaptive host responses. By altering transcription of multiple immune system genes and contributing to antioxidant activities, these vitamins influence the immune system in different ways including modulation of cell-mediated and antibody-mediated responses, immunoregulation, and antiinflammatory effects. Furthermore, supplementation of these vitamins to poultry may assist the immune system to combat microbial pathogens while reducing detrimental effects associated with stress and enhancing responses to vaccines. In this article, the relationship between the chicken immune system and vitamins A, D, E, and C is reviewed, and evidence from the literature pertaining to how these vitamins exert their antiinflammatory, regulatory, and antimicrobial effects is discussed.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.841
Threshold uncertainty score0.679

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.319 · 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 designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations74
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePoultry ScienceSame topicVitamin C and Antioxidants ResearchFrench-language works237,207