ArticleTropical animal health and production2026
AI-Driven prediction of body weight in chicken genotypes with different growth rates.
Article in Tropical animal health and production, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study evaluates four machine learning algorithms: Gaussian Exponential Regression (GER), Feedforward Neural Networks (FFNN), Support Vector Machines (SVM), and Decision Trees (DT) for predicting body weight in chickens with different growth rates (slow-, medium-, and fast-growing breeds). It fills a major research gap by benchmarking these models under uniform conditions across multiple growth categories. Starting at 14 days of age, 300 male chicks (100 of the genotypes SAGA, Sasso, and Cobb 500, which represent slow-, medium-, and fast-growing breeds, respectively) were used in a controlled experiment. Weekly body weight and six (6) morphometric traits were recorded for four weeks and split into training (75%) and validation (25%) sets. A total of 2,160 data records were obtained from weekly morphometric measurements across 300 birds. Model performance was measured by correlation coefficient (R), coefficient of determination (R²), root mean square error (RMSE), mean absolute error (MAE), and mean absolute percentage error (MAPE). Across all growth groups, GER consistently performed better than other models, exhibiting the highest accuracy and lowest errors. FFNN performed well for slow- and medium-growing breeds but showed increased errors for fast-growing Cobb 500. SVM and DT had the poorest results, with higher errors and poor generalizability. Model accuracy was ranked as follows: GER > FFNN > DT/SVM. This study provides recommendations for selecting machine learning models tailored to specific chicken growth rates for accurate weight prediction. Future work should validate these findings on commercial farms and explore hybrid models to improve robustness. GER’s superior performance highlights its potential as a reliable and efficient tool for precision poultry farming.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.