Hen-durance training—effects of an exercise regimen on laying hen muscle architecture and fracture prevalence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Domestic chickens kept for egg laying navigate inclines such as ramps in some commercial housing systems to aid in transitions between housing tiers. Laying hens use their wings and hindlimbs in a locomotion called wing-assisted incline running (WAIR) to ascend steep inclines. There is a potential relationship between the strength of the main flight muscles and the health of the keel bone from which they originate. We sought to test the effects of a controlled, WAIR-based exercise regimen during rearing on keel bone health and muscle properties of white- and brown-feathered laying hens. The WAIR exercise regimen, which consisted of exercise twice weekly for 16 weeks did not promote increases in muscle mass or physiological cross-sectional area at 21 weeks of age (WOA) and did not provide long-term benefits on keel fracture prevalence at 40 WOA. However, the brown-feathered birds were found to have lower amounts of keel fractures at 40 WOA in comparison with the white-feathered birds. Future studies should test for training that begins before chicks become fully feathered, exercises that emphasize full excursion of the wing during downstroke and different levels of intensity, frequency and duration to optimize flight muscle architecture and promote keel bone health.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".