MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4225131781 · doi:10.1016/j.psj.2022.101937

Does light color during brooding and rearing impact broiler productivity?

2022· article· en· W4225131781 on OpenAlexaff
B.M. Remonato Franco, T. Shynkaruk, T.G. Crowe, B.I. Fancher, N. French, S. Gillingham, K. Schwean-Lardner

Bibliographic record

VenuePoultry Science · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Nutrition and Physiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBroilerAnimal scienceFlockBiologyFactorial experimentFeed conversion ratioVeterinary medicineWhite lightMedicineEcologyMathematicsBody weightEndocrinologyOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Light color during brooding and rearing may impact broiler production; however, literature results are inconsistent. To address this, the effects of 3 wavelength spectra on broiler performance in 2 sex and 2 genotypes (Ross YPMx708 and EPMx708) were studied. Broilers were raised (d 0-35) under wavelength programs provided by LED light bulbs (blue (455 nm), green (510 nm) or white) under similar intensities (clux). Two trials were conducted (total number of birds = 14,256; 6 room replications per lighting treatment; 18 replicate pens per light × sex × genotype). Data were analyzed as a 3 × 2 × 2 (wavelength × sex × genotype) factorial design, with trial as a random variable block and wavelength nested within rooms (Proc Mixed, SAS 9.4). Birds raised under white light were heavier than under blue or green light at d7 (P = 0.004), and green at d14 (P = 0.03). Feed intake, gain-to-feed efficiency and flock uniformity (d15, 28) did not differ. Mortality only differed at wk 5, when broilers raised under white light had higher mortality than those raised under blue (P = 0.03). YPM-708 were heavier at 21 d (P = 0.007), 28 d (P = 0.001), and 35 d (P < 0.0001), had a better total feed conversion rate (P < 0.0001), higher mortality for wk 1 (P = 0.001), lower mortality during the last wk (P = 0.02) and better uniformity at 28 d (P = 0.01) than EPM-708 broilers. Males were heavier at all measured ages except d0 (d7-P = 0.03, other weeks P < 0.0001), had better total feed conversion (P < 0.0001), increased weekly mortality except for wk 1 (wk2-P = 0.04, wk3-P = 0.002, wk4, 5, and total-P = 0.0001) and were less uniform (P = 0.0002) than females. YPM-708 and EPM-708 males had higher total feed intake (P < 0.0001), and males raised under white light had higher mortality than females raised under white or blue light (P = 0.01). To conclude, the use of specific light colors (blue and green) had only minor impacts on broiler production when light intensity was equalized and balanced for bird spectral sensitivity, and its use to improve productivity does not appear to be advantageous for broilers in a commercial setting.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.907
Threshold uncertainty score0.978

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.214 · 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.

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

Citations11
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePoultry ScienceSame topicAnimal Nutrition and PhysiologyFrench-language works237,207