MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4220798804 · doi:10.3389/fphys.2022.855266

Light Color and the Commercial Broiler: Effect on Ocular Health and Visual Acuity

2022· article· en· W4220798804 on OpenAlexafffund
B.M. Remonato Franco, Marina L. Leis, Melody Wong, T. Shynkaruk, T.G. Crowe, B.I. Fancher, N. French, S. Gillingham, K. Schwean-Lardner

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Physiology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Nutrition and Physiology
Canadian institutionsSaskatoon City HospitalUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Saskatchewan
KeywordsOphthalmologyVisual acuityRetinoscopyRetinalPupillary light reflexBroilerRefractive errorOptometryMedicineOpticsPupilBiologyAnimal sciencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Light is a critical management factor for broiler production, and the wavelength spectrum, one of its components, can affect bird physiology, behavior and production. Among all the senses, sight is important to birds, and their visual system possess several adaptations that allow them to perceive light differently from humans. Therefore, it is critical to consider whether the exposure to monochromatic light colors influences broiler visual ability, which could affect behavioral expression. The present study examined the effects of various light colors on the visual systems of broiler chickens. Ross 708 males were raised from 0 to 35 days under three wavelength programs [blue (dominant wavelengths near 455 nm), green (dominant wavelengths near 510 nm) or white]. Broilers were given a complete ophthalmic examination, including chromatic pupillary light reflex testing, rebound tonometry, anterior segment biomicroscopy and indirect ophthalmoscopy (n= 36, day 21). To assess ocular anatomy, broilers were euthanized, eyes were weighed, and dimensions were taken (n= 108, day 16 and day 24). An autorefractor was used to assess the refractive index and the corneal curvature (n= 18, day 26). To evaluate spatial vision, broilers underwent a grating acuity test at one of three distances–50, 75, or 100 cm (n= 24, day 29). Data were analyzed as a one-way ANOVA using the MIXED procedure or Proc Par1way for non-normally distributed data. Significant differences were observed for refractive index and spatial vision. Birds raised under blue light were slightly more hyperopic, or far-sighted, than birds raised under white light (P= 0.01). As for spatial vision, birds raised under blue light took less time to approach the stimulus at distances of 50 cm (P= 0.03) and 75 cm (P= 0.0006) and had a higher success rate (choosing the right feeder,P= 0.03) at 100 cm than birds raised under white light. Improvements in spatial vision for birds exposed to blue light can partially explain the behavioral differences resulting from rearing broilers under different wavelengths.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations8
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in PhysiologySame topicAnimal Nutrition and PhysiologyFrench-language works237,207