Maintenance Energy Requirement of Broilers and the Impact of Ambient Temperatures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Eight broiler weight groups, housed in metabolic chambers, were exposed to 3-5 ambient temperatures (AT) such that AT exposure fell below, near and above the projected thermoneutral (TN) zone. Birds were fed 0, 5, and 10% of body weight (W), or allowed to consume food ad libitum, to vary energy consumption. Energy needs for body weight homeostasis, efficiency of metabolizable energy (ME) use for maintenance and the exponent needed to convert live body weight to metabolic weight was estimated. Energy (Kcal W-1 d-1) and oxygen (l W-1 d-1) needs for body weight homeostasis declined curvilinearly as body weight increased from 0.042 kg to 2.44 kg. Such needs were impacted by AT. The efficiency of ME use to support maintenance energy need varied in a cubic fashion with bird mass. The estimated zone of thermoneutrality, at body weight homeostasis, was inversely related to W (kg), expressed as: TN (ºC) = 31.896 – 0.4625∙W (R2 = 0.99). Under metabolic basal rate (MBR) conditions, the TN zone was curvilinearly related to weight as: TNMBR = 32.6466 − (94.4603∙W) − (0.7660∙W2) (R2 = 0.99). The exponent, to linearize live body weight with heat production (HP) of birds fed to W homeostasis, was determined to be 0.758 with all birds strictly housed at TN. Further, the exponent to linearize HP of birds under MBR (fasted) conditions was estimated to be 0.679. Equations relating chick energy and oxygen consumption need with body weight and AT, metabolizable energy for gain homeostasis (MEmg), metabolizable energy for retained energy homeostasis (MEmr), metabolizable energy for protein homeostasis (MEmp), and metabolizable energy for fat homeostasis (MEmf) are presented.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".