Evidence mapPaperPMID 34258446Full record

ArticleAnimal nutrition (Zhongguo xu mu shou yi xue hui)2021

Evaluation of energy values of high-fiber dietary ingredients with different solubility fed to growing pigs using the difference and regression methods.

Zhengqun Liu, Ruqing Zhong, Kai Li, Liang Chen, Bifeng Zhang, Lei Liu, Hongfu Zhang

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Animal nutrition (Zhongguo xu mu shou yi xue hui), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 25% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Zhengqun LiuState Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition, Institute of Animal Science, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing, 100193, China.
Ruqing ZhongState Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition, Institute of Animal Science, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing, 100193, China.
Kai LiState Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition, Institute of Animal Science, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing, 100193, China.
Liang ChenState Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition, Institute of Animal Science, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing, 100193, China.
Bifeng ZhangState Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition, Institute of Animal Science, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing, 100193, China.
Lei LiuState Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition, Institute of Animal Science, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing, 100193, China.
Hongfu ZhangState Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition, Institute of Animal Science, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing, 100193, China.
Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The objective of this study was to compare the energy values of high-fiber dietary ingredients with different solubility (sugar beet pulp [SBP] and defatted rice bran [DFRB]) in growing pigs using the difference and the regression methods. A total of 21 barrows (initial BW, 40.5 ± 1.2 kg) were assigned to 3 blocks with BW as a blocking factor, and each block was assigned to a 7 × 2 incomplete Latin square design with 7 diets and two 13-d experimental periods. The 7 experimental diets consisted of a corn-soybean meal basal diet and 6 additional diets containing 10%, 20%, or 30% SBP or DFRB in the basal diet, respectively. Each of the experimental periods lasted 12 d, with a 7 d dietary adaptation period followed by 5-d total fecal and urine collection. Results showed that the digestible energy (DE) and metabolizable energy (ME) of the SBP determined by the difference method with different inclusion levels (10%, 20%, or 30%) were 2,712 and 2,628 kcal/kg, 2,683 and 2,580 kcal/kg, and 2,643 and 2,554 kcal/kg DM basis, respectively. The DE and ME in the DFRB evaluated by the difference method with 3 different inclusion levels were 2,407 and 2,243 kcal/kg, 2,687 and 2,598 kcal/kg, and 2,630 and 2,544 kcal/kg DM basis, respectively. Different inclusion levels had no effects on the energy values of each test ingredient estimated by the difference method. The DE and ME of the SBP and the DFRB estimated by the regression method were 2,562 and 2,472 kcal/kg and 2,685 and 2,606 kcal/kg DM basis, respectively. The energy values of each ingredient determined by the regression method were similar to the values estimated by the difference method with the 20% or 30% inclusion level. However, the energy values of the SBP and DFRB estimated by the difference method with the 10% inclusion level were inconsistent with the values determined by the regression method (

Indexed as

Difference methodEnergy valueGrowing pigsHigh-fiber ingredientInclusion levelRegression method

Identifiers

PMID34258446
PMCPMC8245795
OpenAlexW3153324606

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 Socratic graph.