MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413422799 · doi:10.1016/j.psj.2025.105716

Pecking block use at individual level is associated with improved eggshell quality and keel fractures in laying hens

2025· article· en· W4413422799 on OpenAlexafffund
Tunmise Faith Ehigbor, A. Michelle Edwards, Ana K. Rentsch, Elijah G. Kiarie, Alexandra Harlander, Tina M. Widowski

Bibliographic record

VenuePoultry Science · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Nutrition and Physiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersOntario Agri-Food Innovation AllianceEgg Farmers of Canada
KeywordsKeelEggshellLayingPecking orderQuality (philosophy)BiologyAnatomyFood scienceEcologyEngineeringStructural engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Laying hens possess a calcium-specific appetite that intensifies towards lights out to meet the high demands for eggshell formation and skeletal maintenance. Pecking blocks (PBs) are edible enrichments that can serve as an additional calcium source. We explored the relationships between PB preference (PBp), PB use, keel fracture status (KS), and eggshell quality. One hundred and twenty Dekalb White and 120 Bovans Brown were housed in twelve enriched cages. Three types of PB differing in calcium and grain content were offered in a series of paired preference tests over three 4-week periods in phase 1 of the study (26 to 39 WOA). This was repeated in phase 2 (41 to 48 WOA), with three 2-week periods. Block pecking behavior was measured at the individual level by live observations of 7 focal birds per cage (n = 77) once weekly (3-time intervals). Relative PBp was based on the frequency of pecks calculated as preference ratio between PBs. Hens were categorized as PB "users" or "nonusers" based on the number of pecks at all blocks throughout the experiment. After each period, hens with PBp were isolated for egg collection. The egg weight (EW in g), shell breaking strength (SBS in kg force), and shell thickness (ST in mm) were analyzed. Using radiography, we scored keel fractures at 40 WOA (baseline) and after each period in phase 2. Consistency of hen's PBp between phases was determined using kappa analysis and indicated moderate agreement (kappa = 0.6). PBp had no association with KS (p = 0.36), EW(p = 0.64), and SBS (p = 0.68). However, block "users" maintained ST over time (p = 0.002) and had higher SBS (p = 0.009) compared to "nonusers." Hens who experienced a new keel fracture during phase 2 (n = 11) increased pecking in phase 2 compared to phase 1 (p= 0.023) and pecked more than hens without a keel fracture in phase 2 (n = 11; p= 0.006). This study suggests that individual hens' use of pecking blocks may reflect individual calcium demand for eggshell formation and bone repair.

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)0.000
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 score0.313
Threshold uncertainty score0.311

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.100
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.214 · 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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePoultry ScienceSame topicAnimal Nutrition and PhysiologyFrench-language works237,207