MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4224305181 · doi:10.1186/s40643-022-00529-z

Conventional use and sustainable valorization of spent egg-laying hens as functional foods and biomaterials: A review

2022· review· en· W4224305181 on OpenAlexafffund
Hongbing Fan, Jianping Wu

Bibliographic record

VenueBioresources and Bioprocessing · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Nutrition and Physiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAlberta InnovatesKillam TrustsAlberta Innovates - Technology Futures
KeywordsFood wasteBusinessRaw materialWaste managementAnimal feedPet foodValue addedSustainabilityAnimal wasteCompostBiotechnologyEnvironmental scienceEngineeringFood scienceBiologyEcologyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Spent hen are egg-laying hens reaching the end of their laying cycles; billions of spent hens are produced globally each year. Differences in people's attitudes towards spent hen as foods lead to their different fates among countries. While spent hens are consumed as raw or processed meat products in Asian countries such as China, India, Korea, and Thailand, they are treated as a byproduct or waste, not a food product, in the western society; they are instead disposed by burial, incineration, composting (as fertilizers), or rendering into animal feed and pet food, which either create little market value or cause animal welfare and environmental concerns. Despite being a waste, spent hen is a rich source of animal proteins and lipids, which are suitable starting materials for developing valorized products. This review discussed the conventional uses of spent hens, including food, animal feed, pet food, and compost, and the emerging uses, including biomaterials and functional food ingredients. These recent advances enable more sustainable utilization of spent hen, contributing to alternative solutions to its disposal while yielding residual value to the egg industry. Future research will continue to focus on the conversion of spent hen biomass into value-added products.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.103
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.192 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations39
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBioresources and BioprocessingSame topicAnimal Nutrition and PhysiologyFrench-language works237,207