2016
DOI: 10.1590/1806-9061-2015-0066
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Abstract: This paper discusses the Bayesian approach as an alternative to the classical analysis of nonlinear models for growth curve data in Japanese quail. A Bayesian nonlinear modeling method is introduced and compared with the classical nonlinear least squares (NLS) method using three non-linear models that are widely used in modeling the growth data of poultry. The Gompertz, Richards and Logistic models were fitted to 499 Japanese quail weekly averaged body weight data. Normal prior was assumed for all growth curve… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
13
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 22 publications
(16 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
3
13
0
Order By: Relevance
“…a,b,c Different letters on the columns indicate significant differences (p<0.05) between the parameters involved in the contrast by means of Bayesian comparisons at a 95% credibility level. Comparing the asymptotic weight of mixed Japanese laying quail of yellow and red strains (155.9 and 168.9 g, respectively) and maturity rate (0.070 and 0.069, respectively) with the results found in the literature, lower values were observed in relation to those found by Firat et al (2016) for asymptotic weight and maturity rate for mixed Japanese quail, which presented values of 222.1 g and 0.080, respectively. The values for asymptotic weight and maturity rate found by Mota et al (2015) for mixed laying quail were similar to those found in this study, whose estimations were 166.39 g and 0.072, respectively.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 48%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…a,b,c Different letters on the columns indicate significant differences (p<0.05) between the parameters involved in the contrast by means of Bayesian comparisons at a 95% credibility level. Comparing the asymptotic weight of mixed Japanese laying quail of yellow and red strains (155.9 and 168.9 g, respectively) and maturity rate (0.070 and 0.069, respectively) with the results found in the literature, lower values were observed in relation to those found by Firat et al (2016) for asymptotic weight and maturity rate for mixed Japanese quail, which presented values of 222.1 g and 0.080, respectively. The values for asymptotic weight and maturity rate found by Mota et al (2015) for mixed laying quail were similar to those found in this study, whose estimations were 166.39 g and 0.072, respectively.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 48%
“…Similar to this study, Firat et al (2016) worked with Japanese laying quail and applied to body weight data for growth description nonlinear models (Richards, Gompertz, and Logistic) under a Bayesian approach using DIC criterion to select the best model. DIC statistics of the above-mentioned models indicated that both Gompertz and Richards's functions presented a good fit to the data, being superior to the Logistic model considering the goodness of fit.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Comparing the asymptotic weight of mixed Japanese laying quail of yellow and red strains (155.9 and 168.9 g, respectively) and maturity rate (0.070 and 0.069, respectively) with the results found in the literature, lower values were observed in relation to those found by Firat et al (2016) for asymptotic weight and maturity rate for mixed Japanese quail, which presented values of 222.1 g and 0.080, respectively. The values for asymptotic weight and maturity rate found by Mota et al (2015) for mixed laying quail were similar to those found in this study, whose estimations were 166.39 g and 0.072, respectively.…”
Section: Posterior Summary Measures and Pairwise Contrasts Between Pasupporting
confidence: 48%
“…The reported W 0 and k parameters for white and brown strains are in agreement with those of the present findings, but the reported W f and m values for brown and white strains were smaller than ours. Different growth parameters among different studies could result from different genotypes, environmental conditions, and fitted functions for strains (22).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%