Correlated responses to divergent selection for phytate phosphorus bioavailability in a randombred chicken population
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The current study was undertaken to evaluate the correlated responses to 3 generations of divergent selection for phytate phosphorus bioavailability (PBA) in the Athens-Canadian randombred chicken population. The traits studied were BW at 4 wk of age, BW gain (BWG), feed consumption (FC), and feed conversion ratio (FCR) during a period of 3 d. The first evaluation criterion was the cumulated divergent correlated response (CR(C)), which was calculated as the line difference of the least square means of phenotypic values for each trait at a given generation after adjustment for sex and hatch effects. The results showed a consistent correlated response in BW across generations. The CR(C) at generation G3 was 26.8 g (P < 0.01). The chickens in the low PBA line (L line) had higher BW than the high PBA line (H line). The CR(C) for BWG, FC, and FCR were significant (P < 0.05) only at G3. The second evaluation criterion was the average best linear unbiased prediction estimated breeding value (EBV). The results showed asymmetric genetic trends in BW, BWG, and FC, and the correlated responses were mainly due to the genetic changes that occurred in H line because little genetic change occurred in L line across generations. At G3, the line differences of EBV were close to the CR(C) values for all the traits except FCR. This suggested that CR(C) and EBV criteria would tend to be consistent with the increase across generations. However, at G1 and G2, the line differences of the EBV actually deviated from the CR(C) values for BWG and FC. The inconsistency could be attributed to experimental errors and genetic drift that were not accounted by the fixed model for obtaining CR(C).
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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 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".