MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415120452 · doi:10.5536/kjps.2025.52.3.185

The Current Status of Support and Long-Term Plans for the Conservation Policies of Livestock Genetic Resources in Various Countries

2025· article· en· W4415120452 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ji-Won Kim, Dong-Hun No, Eun Jung Cho, Huimang Song, Seungchang Kim, Manhye Han, Sang-Hyon Oh

Bibliographic record

VenueKorean Journal of Poultry Science · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgricultural Systems and Practices
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersRural Development Administration
KeywordsLivestockGeneral partnershipEndangered speciesGenetic resourcesSustainabilityBiodiversity conservation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Biodiversity is essential for ecosystem stability, food security, and livestock breeding, yet many genetic resources are at risk of being lost. Therefore, this study aims to suggest a developmental direction for policy in the Republic of Korea by comparatively analyzing the conservation policies and international trends for livestock genetic resources in major countries (Germany, USA, UK, India, Canada, and France). For this purpose, the institutional frameworks, financial support, and key conservation projects of each country were comprehensively reviewed through official reports and research papers. The analysis revealed that major developed countries share common strategies: long-term support through stable public funds (e.g., Germany’s FAKT II, Canada’s Sustainable CAP), conservation of endangered breeds through public-private partnerships (e.g., the UK’s RBST), and systematic data-based management and utilization (e.g., the USA’s ARS). Based on these global best practices, this study suggests that establishing systematic support policies and institutions including securing a stable budget, introducing effective public-private partnership models, and advancing data-based management systems is essential for conserving domestic genetic diversity.

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 score0.056
Threshold uncertainty score0.231

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.258 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueKorean Journal of Poultry ScienceSame topicAgricultural Systems and PracticesFrench-language works237,207