MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3158609105 · doi:10.1080/00071668.2021.1921109

The efficacy of three on-farm euthanasia methods for broiler chickens throughout the production cycle

2021· article· en· W3158609105 on OpenAlexafffund
Bethany Baker-Cook, Stephanie Torrey, Tina M. Widowski, Patricia V. Turner, T.D. Knezacek, Jenny Nicholds, K. Schwean-Lardner

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Poultry Science · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicForensic Entomology and Diptera Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersChicken Farmers of SaskatchewanPoultry Industry CouncilNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Poultry Research Council
KeywordsBroilerPalpebral fissureMedicineReflexThree gorgesVeterinary medicineBiologyAnesthesiaSurgeryAnimal science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

1. There is a need to humanely kill moribund or injured broiler birds on-farm with no reasonable chance of recovery. Two experiments evaluated the efficacy of three commercially applicable killing methods; manual cervical dislocation (CD), mechanical cervical dislocation with the Koechner Euthanising Device (KED) and a non-penetrative captive bolt device (Zephyr-EXL; ZEXL), at 7, 21 or 35 d of age, on their ability to induce insensibility (unconsciousness and loss of brain stem reflexes) and death.2. Experiment one assessed the damage to the cranial-cervical region resulting from the methods applied to cadavers of cull birds (n = 180) by radiography and gross pathology observation.3. Experiment two evaluated the latency to insensibility and death when cull broiler birds (n = 240) were killed by CD, KED or ZEXL, using behavioural and reflexive indicators. Insensibility and death were measured by the absence of pupillary light, palpebral blink and nictitating membrane reflexes and cessation of rhythmic breathing, cloacal winking and convulsions. Analysis of variance for the main effect of the method was performed to determine the differences.4. In experiment one, only the Zephyr resulted in skull fractures. A higher number of vertebral fractures occurred with KED application compared to CD, at 21 and 35 d.5. In experiment two, indicators of sensibility were absent earliest with the ZEXL (μ < 2 s); then,CD (μ = 28 s) and were longest with KED (μ = 47 s), at 21 and 35 d. Cloacal winking and convulsions ceased earlier after CD (88 s), compared to either KED (124 s) or Zephyr (118 s). Death after a single application occurred 100%, 100% and 98% of time for CD, KED and ZEXL, respectively.6. Overall, all methods were efficacious at inducing insensibility and death. Insensibility occurred earliest with ZEXL, whilst death occurred earliest with CD. KED resulted in the longest time to insensibility and death.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.948
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.298 · 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.

Study designObservational
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

Citations9
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Poultry ScienceSame topicForensic Entomology and Diptera StudiesFrench-language works237,207