MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4318043871 · doi:10.1098/rsos.220809

Does wing use and disuse cause behavioural and musculoskeletal changes in domestic fowl ( <i>Gallus gallus domesticus</i> )?

2023· article· en· W4318043871 on OpenAlexafffund
Renée Garant, Bret W. Tobalske, Neila Ben Sassi, Nienke van Staaveren, Dan Tulpan, Tina M. Widowski, Donald R. Powers, Alexandra Harlander-Matauschek

Bibliographic record

VenueRoyal Society Open Science · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Nutrition and Physiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersCanada First Research Excellence FundMinistry of Agriculture, Food and Rural AffairsAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaOntario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs
KeywordsWingPectoralis major muscleSling (weapon)FeatherFowlBiologyAnatomyLeg muscleGallus gallus domesticusKeelMedicineAnimal scienceZoologySurgeryEcologyPhysical medicine and rehabilitation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Domestic chickens may live in environments which restrict wing muscle usage. Notably, reduced wing activity and accompanying muscle weakness are hypothesized risk factors for keel bone fractures and deviations. We used radio-frequency identification (RFID) to measure duration spent at elevated resources (feeders, nest-boxes), ultrasonography to measure muscle thickness (breast and lower leg) changes, radiography and palpation to determine fractures and deviations, respectively, following no, partial (one-sided wing sling) and full (cage) immobilization in white- and brown-feathered birds. We hypothesized partially immobilized hens would reduce elevated resource usage and that both immobilization groups would show decreased pectoralis thickness (disuse) and increased prevalence of fractures and deviations. Elevated nest-box usage was 42% lower following five weeks of partial immobilization for brown-feathered hens but no change in resource usage in white-feathered birds was observed. Fully immobilized, white-feathered hens showed a 17% reduction in pectoralis thickness, while the brown-feathered counterparts showed no change. Lastly, fractures and deviations were not affected in either strain or form of wing immobilization; however, overall low numbers of birds presented with these issues. Altogether, this study shows a profound difference between white- and brown-feathered hens in response to wing immobilization and associated muscle physiology.

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)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.372
Threshold uncertainty score0.486

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.257 · 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

Citations5
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRoyal Society Open ScienceSame topicAnimal Nutrition and PhysiologyFrench-language works237,207