Evidence mapPaperPMID 39925835Full record

ArticleIranian journal of veterinary research2024

Comparative effects of herbal additive, symbiotic and antibiotic on growth performance, blood constituents, gut microbiota, and immune response in broiler chickens.

F Tavakolinasab, K Taherpour, A Rostamzad

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Iranian journal of veterinary research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

F TavakolinasabGraduated from Faculty of Agriculture, Ilam University, Ilam, Iran.
K TaherpourDepartment of Animal Sciences, Faculty of Agriculture, Ilam University, Ilam, Iran.
A RostamzadDepartment of Biology, Faculty of Science, Ilam University, Ilam, Iran.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Using medicinal plants in broiler diets has been gaining attention as an alternative to synthetic additives due to their potential health benefits and lower risk of residue accumulation. Aims: The present study primarily aimed to evaluate and compare the effects of herbal additives, specifically barberry ( Methods: A total of 384 one-day-old broiler chicks (Ross 308) were assigned to eight different dietary treatments, with six replicates per treatment. Experimental diets included control diet (CON), and other experimental groups were supplemented with 0.2 g/kg virginiamycin (VM), symbiotic (SS), 1 g/kg (B Results: The study results indicated that body weight increased in birds fed with VM and SS-supplemented diets (P<0.05) during 1 to 42 days of age. All dietary treatments except CON increased the count of Conclusion: A mix of sumac and barberry (1%) powdered seeds has the potential to improve performance, and disease responsiveness and intestinal microbiota in broiler.

Indexed as

BarberryBroiler chickensImmune systemMicrobiotaSumac

Identifiers

PMID39925835
PMCPMC11801321

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.