Quantifying the effect of coccidiosis on broiler performance and infection outcomes in the presence and absence of control methods
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to investigate the role of Eimeria species, dose and inoculation time, on performance and infection outcomes of different broiler strains infected for different study durations. The meta-analysis addressed E. acervulina, E. maxima, E. tenella, and mixed species infections, and involved data from 72 peer-reviewed articles, corresponding to 521 treatments performed on 20,756 broilers. A secondary objective was to investigate the effects of synthetic anticoccidials, ionophores, and vaccination against Eimeria on the above outcomes. Performance during infection was scaled (%) to that of the uninfected birds. Infection reduced scaled ADFI and ADG (P < 0.001) and increased feed conversion ratio (FCR; P < 0.05); there was a significant interaction between dose and species on scaled ADFI and ADG, suggesting that different species affected these variables to different extents (P < 0.001). There was a tendency for an interaction between dose and broiler strain on scaled ADFI (P = 0.079), and a significant interaction between these variables on scaled ADG (P < 0.01). A tendency for an interaction between oocyst dose and Eimeria species (P = 0.067) on maximum number of oocysts excreted was observed. Lesion scores were significantly affected by dose, species, and their interaction (P < 0.05), the latter caused by an increase in the lesion scores during E. maxima and E. tenella infections. Control methods significantly affected scaled ADG and FCR (P < 0.05) and there was an interaction between dose and control methods on ADFI (P < 0.001). Synthetic anticoccidial use improved scaled ADG (P < 0.01), whereas ionophores improved FCR compared with untreated birds (P < 0.01). An interaction between dose and control method on scaled ADFI was caused by the higher ADFI of vaccinated compared to untreated birds, as dose increased. There was a significant effect of control methods on lesion scores (P < 0.01). All findings advance our understanding of the factors that influence the impact of coccidiosis and its controls in broilers.
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 | 0.023 | 0.036 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.015 | 0.033 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".