Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 320

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Broiler performance, body weight variance, feed and water intake, and carcass quality at different stocking densities

Open access
Feddes, JJ, Emmanuel, EJ, Zuidhoft, MJ·2002·Poultry Science

Abstract

The effects of four stocking and water nipple densities on broiler performance and carcass traits were measured in two trials. The stocking densities of 23.8, 17.9, 14.3, and 11.9 birds/m2 corresponded to 260, 195, 156, and 130 birds per pen, respectively. The water nipple densities were 5, 10, 15, and 20 birds per water nipple. Birds in Trial 1 were processed at Day 39 and those in Trial 2 were processed at Day 42. Water and feed were provided ad libitum and light was provided 23 h/ d. Water nipple density had no effect on broiler performance or carcass quality. Birds grown at 23.8 birds/m2 had lower BW (1,898 g) and carcass weights (1,334 g), whereas birds grown at 14.3 birds/m2 had the highest BW (1,985 g) and carcass weights (1,432 g). Although the treatment with 23.8 birds/m2 gave the lowest BW, the yield of broilers per unit of floor space was highest (46.0 kg/m2). The coefficient of variation for BW was higher in the treatment with 11.9 birds/m2 (15.3 %) than in the other treatments (13.0%). The birds in the treatment with 11.9 birds/m2 consumed the least feed (2,993 g/bird) and those in the 14.3 birds/m2 treatment consumed the most feed (3,183 g/bird). The amount of water consumed and the water to feed ratio was highest in the 23.8 birds/m2 treatment (5,546 mL/bird and 1.85 mL/g, respectively). Stocking density had no effect on mortality, breast yield, carcass grading, incidence of scratches, or carcass quality. It was concluded high yield per unit area with good carcass quality could be achieved when ventilation rate and air circulation were adequate.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/ps/81.6.774

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Cited by

See all 320

Metadata

Authors
Feddes, J., Emmanuel, E., & Zuidhoft, M.
Venue
Poultry Science
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2002-06
Volume
81
Issue
6
Pages
774-779
ISSN
0032-5791 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2057860558
Cited by
320
References
2
FWCI
7.08
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Broiler performance, body weight variance, feed and water intake, and carcass quality at different stocking densities. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/ps/81.6.774
The paper
Feddes, J., Emmanuel, E., & Zuidhoft, M. (2002). Broiler performance, body weight variance, feed and water intake, and carcass quality at different stocking densities. Poultry Science. https://doi.org/10.1093/ps/81.6.774

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.