Физиологические и воспроизводительные особенности мясных кур родительского стада с разной стрессовой чувствительностью
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We studied the physiological and reproductive qualities of chickens due to different levels of stress sensitivity, defined by the author. The method involves modeling the local adaptation syndrome by intradermal 70% solution of turpentine in a dose of 0,1 ml in the area beard. Accounting for the reaction is carried out 24 hours after the administration of turpentine on the development of signs of development of local adaptation syndrome in the form of aseptic inflammation. The most significant features include thickening beard, a high local temperature, severe redness, tenderness to palpation. In the absence of these signs is estimated negative reaction and a bird recognized stress-resistant, in the presence of signs of inflammation reaction is positive, and the bird is recognized stress-induced, in cases where there is some evidence of mild inflammatory reaction rated as doubtful and bird is considered doubtful stress. The studies found that the reproductive qualities of stress-resistant chickens higher as compared with the stress-sensitive. We are sensitive to the stress of hens, in response to a threshold stimulus, compared with stress-resistant chickens found a higher concentration of stress hormones adrenaline and corticosterone by 2.4 times (P = 0.002) and 2-fold (P = 0.019), respectively. Leukocyte reaction resulting impact of stressing, characterized by a change H/L ratio, a stress-sensitive chickens ratio H/L is increased 2.2-fold (P
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.021 | 0.007 |
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".