Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40400022›Full record

ArticleJournal of animal science and biotechnology2025

Glucose release kinetics of different feed ingredients and their impact on short-term growth of pigs by influencing carbon-nitrogen supply synchronization.

Mingyi Huang, Lei Xue, Yifan Wu, Qinzheng Sun, Yanwei Xu, Jia Li, Xiaoyi Yu, Yu Cao, Jingyi Huang, Zeyu Zhang and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of animal science and biotechnology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. 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

14 authors.

Mingyi HuangState Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition and Feeding, College of Animal Science and Technology, China Agricultural University, Beijing, 100193, PR China.
Lei XueState Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition and Feeding, College of Animal Science and Technology, China Agricultural University, Beijing, 100193, PR China.
Yifan WuState Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition and Feeding, College of Animal Science and Technology, China Agricultural University, Beijing, 100193, PR China.
Qinzheng SunState Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition and Feeding, College of Animal Science and Technology, China Agricultural University, Beijing, 100193, PR China.
Yanwei XuState Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition and Feeding, College of Animal Science and Technology, China Agricultural University, Beijing, 100193, PR China.
Jia LiState Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition and Feeding, College of Animal Science and Technology, China Agricultural University, Beijing, 100193, PR China.
Xiaoyi YuState Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition and Feeding, College of Animal Science and Technology, China Agricultural University, Beijing, 100193, PR China.
Yu CaoState Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition and Feeding, College of Animal Science and Technology, China Agricultural University, Beijing, 100193, PR China.
Jingyi HuangState Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition and Feeding, College of Animal Science and Technology, China Agricultural University, Beijing, 100193, PR China.
Zeyu ZhangState Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition and Feeding, College of Animal Science and Technology, China Agricultural University, Beijing, 100193, PR China.
Jinbiao ZhaoState Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition and Feeding, College of Animal Science and Technology, China Agricultural University, Beijing, 100193, PR China.
Dandan HanState Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition and Feeding, College of Animal Science and Technology, China Agricultural University, Beijing, 100193, PR China.
Defa LiState Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition and Feeding, College of Animal Science and Technology, China Agricultural University, Beijing, 100193, PR China.
Junjun WangState Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition and Feeding, College of Animal Science and Technology, China Agricultural University, Beijing, 100193, PR China. wangjj@cau.edu.cn.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9427-3824

Funding

111 Project No. B16044China Agricultural Research System CARS-35National Key Research and Development Program of China 2021YFD1300201National Natural Science Foundation of China 32125036National Natural Science Foundation of China 32330100
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPigs fed diets with different ingredients but identical nutritional levels show significant differences in growth performance, indicating that growth may also be influenced by the synchronicity of dietary carbon and nitrogen supply. Therefore, this study aimed to determine glucose release kinetics of various feed ingredients, to investigate a glucose release pattern that is conducive to synchronized carbon-nitrogen supply, and to elucidate the underlying mechanisms by which this synchronization optimizes growth of pigs.

resultsWe analyzed the glucose release kinetics of 23 feed ingredients in vitro and found that their glucose release rates and amounts varied greatly. Based on this, a nitrogen-free diet and 5 purified diets, which represented the observed variations in glucose release rates and quantities among feed ingredients, were designed for 18 ileal-cannulated pigs. The results demonstrated that slower glucose release pattern could disrupt the synchrony of dietary carbon and nitrogen supply, reducing the growth of pigs and increasing nitrogen losses. Specifically, the diet with slower and moderate amounts of glucose release showed a relatively slower release of amino acids. Pigs fed this diet had the lower amino acid digestibility and the enrichment of harmful bacteria, such as Streptococcus, in the terminal ileum. Conversely, the diets with slower and lower glucose release exhibited a relatively rapid release of amino acids but also resulted in poor growth. They increased glucogenic amino acid digestibility and potentially enriched bacteria involved in nitrogen cycling and carbon metabolism. Notably, only the diet with rapid glucose release achieved synchronized and rapid release of nutrients. Pigs fed this diet exhibited higher amino acid digestibility, decreased harmful bacteria enrichment, improved nutrient utilization, and enhanced short-term growth performance.

conclusionsOur research analyzed significant differences in glucose release kinetics among swine feed ingredients and revealed that slow glucose release disrupted dietary carbon-nitrogen supply synchrony, shifting amino acid utilization and enriching pathogens, negatively impacting growth and nutrient utilization. Consequently, choosing feed ingredients releasing glucose at a rapid rate to balance dietary carbon and nitrogen supply helps promote pig growth, and ensures efficient feed utilization.

Indexed as

Energy and nitrogen utilizationGlucose release kineticsGrowth performancePigSynchronized nutrient supply

Identifiers

PMID40400022
PMCPMC12096610

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.