Evaluating the effects of stocking density on the behavior, health, and welfare of turkey hens to 11 weeks of age
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nicholas Select hens (n = 3,550 poults in each of 2 experimental trials) were randomly placed in 1 of 4 stocking density (SD) treatments of 30, 40, 50, or 60 kg/m2 until 11 wk. Birds were housed in open rooms (67.5 m2) with 4 replications per treatment. Ventilation was adjusted in each room independently to ensure air quality measures did not differ across replicate rooms. At wk 8 and 11, footpad lesions, mobility, feather cover and cleanliness, behavior (recorded), and litter moisture were evaluated. Incidences of aggressive pecking were recorded daily. Heterophil/lymphocyte (H/L) ratios were evaluated at 3, 5, 8, and 11 wk. Data were analyzed using regression analyses in SAS 9.4 (Proc Reg and Proc RSReg; SD as independent variable). Differences were considered significant when P ≤ 0.05. Gait scores were not affected by SD. Average footpad scores worsened with increasing SD at wk 8 (linear) but were not affected at wk 11. Total feather cover scores and average feather cleanliness were poorer at high SD (linear) at wk 8 and 11. The incidence of aggressive pecking and culls for aggressive damage decreased linearly as SD increased. At 5 (linear) and 11 (quadratic) wk, H/L ratios increased as SD increased. At 8 wk, H/L ratios were highest in the 40 kg/m2 treatment (quadratic). At 8 wk, the percentage of birds at the feeder, resting, and total disturbances linearly increased as SD increased. The percentage of birds standing, walking, and litter pecking decreased linearly with increasing SD, while total aggressive behaviors (sum of fighting and aggressive pecking) decreased (quadratic). At 11 wk, the percentage of birds at the drinker, and decreased with increasing SD while resting, feather pecking, and severe disturbances increased as SD increased. Litter moisture increased linearly with increasing SD (wk 11). Turkey hen health and welfare were negatively impacted by higher SD. At low SD, there was notably more aggression which may also impact welfare.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".