Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 220

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Stocking density effects on growth performance and processing yields of heavy broilers

Open access
Dozier, W.A., Thaxton, J.P., Branton, S.L., Morgan, G.W., Miles, D.M., Roush, W.B., Lott, B.D., Vizzier-Thaxton, Y.·2005·Poultry Science

Abstract

This study examined responses of male broilers during a 49-d production cycle to 4 placement densities in 2 trials. Trials were pooled because no treatment x trial interaction occurred. In each trial, 1,488 male chicks were randomly placed into 32 floor pens to simulate final densities of 30 (37 chicks/pen), 35 (43 chicks/ pen), 40 (50 chicks/pen), and 45 (56 chicks/pen) kg of BW/m2 of floor space based on a projected final BW of 3.29 kg. Growth rate and nutrient utilization were similar (P > or = 0.05) among the treatments from 1 to 32 d of age. From 1 to 49 d, BW gain (P = 0.011) and feed consumption (P = 0.029) were adversely affected by increasing the placement density from 30 to 45 kg of BW/m2 of floor space. The reduction in cumulative BW gain due to placement density can be partially explained by less feed consumption as evidenced by 95.4% of the sums of squares of BW gain being attributable to feed consumption. Litter moisture content (P = 0.025) and foot pad lesion score (P = 0.001) increased linearly with increasing placement density. Upon processing, whole carcass and breast meat yields relative to BW were not affected (P > or = 0.05) as density increased from 30 to 45 kg/m2. The proportion of whole carcasses with scratches, but not tears, on the back and thighs increased (P = 0.021) as density increased. These results indicate that increasing the density beyond 30 kg/m2 elicited some negative effects on live performance of heavy broilers.

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/84.8.1332

Cites

1 of 1 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

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 220

Metadata

Authors
Dozier, W. A., Thaxton, J. P., Branton, S. L., Morgan, G. W., Miles, D. M., Roush, W. B., Lott, B. D., & Vizzier-Thaxton, Y.
Venue
Poultry Science
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2005-08
Volume
84
Issue
8
Pages
1332-1338
ISSN
0032-5791 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2029099390
Cited by
220
References
1
FWCI
8.47
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: Stocking density effects on growth performance and processing yields of heavy broilers. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/ps/84.8.1332
The paper
Dozier, W. A., Thaxton, J. P., Branton, S. L., Morgan, G. W., Miles, D. M., Roush, W. B., Lott, B. D., & Vizzier-Thaxton, Y. (2005). Stocking density effects on growth performance and processing yields of heavy broilers. Poultry Science. https://doi.org/10.1093/ps/84.8.1332

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.