ArticleVeterinary and animal science2025
Effect of postbiotics on the production parameters of rearing goose.
Article in Veterinary and animal science, 2025. 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Our aim was to measure the mortality, live body weight, feed conversion, intake and detect the weight and stiffness of the liver, liver colour, breast and thigh weight as an effect of the dry form of Burain® postbiotic supplementation in rearing goose. The goslings were allocated into 5 equal groups: control (without supplementation), group 1 (1 g/kg postbiotic during the starter and grower period), group 2 (2 g/kg postbiotic during the starter and grower period), group 3 (0.2 g/kg postbiotic during the starter and grower period), group 4 (1 g/kg postbiotic during the starter period). Granulated feed and drinking water were provided ad libitum to all rearing goose. Supplementation significantly increased body weight in group 2 (6321.84±664.9 g) on week 8. Group 2 showed a significantly reduced feed conversion ratio (1.51±0.04), while groups 1 and 4 exhibited significantly lower daily feed intake than the control during the starter phase. There were no significant differences among groups in foie gras parameters or in thigh and breast weights. The liver weight and stiffness were found to be significantly positively correlated in each treatment group. The supplementation made a significant difference in the parameters of b* and L* for liver colour, but not for a* values. The impact of postbiotic supplementation in the rearing period is extended to weeks. Further investigations are needed to connect information from rearing to the fattening phase and the gut microbiome in goose.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.