MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411109500 · doi:10.3389/fphys.2025.1585645

Role of nutritional and metabolic status on the pullet to hen transition and lifetime productivity

2025· review· en· W4411109500 on OpenAlexaff
Thiago L. Noetzold, M.J. Zuidhof

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Physiology · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Nutrition and Physiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProductivityBiologyEconomicsEconomic growth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Modern poultry industry is divided into two main commercial categories: laying hens (egg-type) and broiler breeders (meat-type). They have been selected differently over the past 100 years. Despite the difference in egg production between egg- and meat-type chickens, similar physiological triggers are attributed to both during the transition from pullet to hen. In addition to the photoperiod threshold, reproduction in chickens is also connected to three main metabolic thresholds: nutrient intake, body weight (BW), and carcass composition. Much is still unknown regarding the physiological effects of these thresholds. Many differences in management and nutritional strategies have been attributed to egg- and meat-type chickens. However, not a lot of emphasis has been put on the possible physiological similarities between the main metabolic factors (body composition and nutrient intake) and thresholds (critical BW and body fat) affecting egg- and meat-type pullets during the transition to the reproduction period. Therefore, this review summarized current knowledge on the metabolic status of the pullets affecting the onset of sexual maturation, focusing on its integration with photoperiodic cues and reproductive physiology, and how the latter is affected by the metabolic status of egg- and meat-type chickens.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations6
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in PhysiologySame topicAnimal Nutrition and PhysiologyFrench-language works237,207