ArticlePoultry science2026
Artificial incubation in family poultry farming systems in Brazil: technical feasibility and incubation performance.
Article in Poultry science, 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Family poultry farming plays an important role in food security and income generation in rural Brazil; however, chick production in these systems still relies predominantly on natural incubation, which limits productivity and flock renewal. This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility and effectiveness of artificial incubation in family poultry farming systems by characterizing the socioeconomic profile and knowledge of rural producers regarding artificial incubation, implementing training and incubator distribution, and comparing incubation performance between rural farm and laboratory environments. The research was conducted in four regions of Minas Gerais, Brazil, and involved 87 family poultry farmers operating free-range production systems. Structured questionnaires were applied to characterize producers' socioeconomic profiles, management practices, and knowledge regarding artificial incubation. From this group, 45 producers received theoretical and practical training (20 h) and were equipped with single-stage incubators with a capacity of 100 eggs. A total of 87 incubation trials were performed, including 45 trials on rural farms and 42 trials in laboratory environments. Producers were predominantly aged 50 years or older, had low formal education, and reported poultry farming as their main animal production activity. Although 74.7% were familiar with artificial incubation and recognized its advantages, reliance on broody hens (49.4%) and lack of egg sanitization (60.9%) were still common. There were no differences between farm and laboratory settings regarding hatchability (62.40 ± 2.19% vs. 62.87 ± 2.45%), hatchability of fertile eggs (80.09 ± 1.90% vs. 78.36 ± 2.38%), fertility (77.79 ± 1.81% vs. 80.42 ± 1.99%), stage-specific embryonic mortality, or overall incubation losses. These results demonstrate that family poultry farmers, when provided with appropriate training and technical support, are capable of achieving incubation outcomes equivalent to those obtained under controlled laboratory conditions. Artificial incubation is therefore a technically viable and scalable technology to improve chick availability, support flock renewal, and strengthen family poultry farming systems in Brazil.
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.