ArticleJournal of comparative physiology. B, Biochemical, systemic, and environmental physiology2015
Digesta retention patterns of solute and different-sized particles in camelids compared with ruminants and other foregut fermenters.
Article in Journal of comparative physiology. B, Biochemical, systemic, and environmental physiology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 36 citations in OpenAlex.
- Host Phylogeny Shapes Gut Microbiota and Predicted Functions in Captive Artiodactyls.Microorganisms · 2025Article
- Teeth and the gastrointestinal tract in mammals: when 1 + 1 = 3.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2023Review
- Anatomical, Histological, and Immunohistochemical Description of the Abomasum in One-Humped Adult Camel (Archives of Razi Institute · 2023Article
- The Ruminant sorting mechanism protects teeth from abrasives.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2022Article
- No size-dependent net particle retention in the hindgut of horses.Journal of animal physiology and animal nutrition · 2022Article
- Reticular contraction frequency and ruminal gas dome development in goats do not differ between grass and browse diets.Journal of animal physiology and animal nutrition · 2022Article
- A pilot study on dietary and faecal calcium/phosphorus ratios in different types of captive ruminating herbivores.Veterinary medicine and science · 2022Article
- Preliminary evidence for a forestomach washing mechanism in llamas (Mammalian biology = Zeitschrift fur Saugetierkunde · 2021Article
- Article
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 at 6 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The mean retention times (MRT) of solute or particles in the gastrointestinal tract and the forestomach (FS) are crucial determinants of digestive physiology in herbivores. Besides ruminants, camelids are the only herbivores that have evolved rumination as an obligatory physiological process consisting of repeated mastication of large food particles, which requires a particle sorting mechanism in the FS. Differences between camelids and ruminants have hardly been investigated so far. In this study we measured MRTs of solute and differently sized particles (2, 10, and 20 mm) and the ratio of large-to-small particle MRT, i.e. the selectivity factors (SF(10/2mm), SF(20/2mm), SF(20/10mm)), in three camelid species: alpacas (Vicugna pacos), llamas (Llama glama), and Bactrian camels (Camelus bactrianus). The camelid data were compared with literature data from ruminants and non-ruminant foregut fermenters (NRFF). Camelids and ruminants both had higher SF(10/2mm)FS than NRFF, suggesting convergence in the function of the FS sorting mechanism in contrast to NRFF, in which such a sorting mechanism is absent. The SF(20/10mm)FS did not differ between ruminants and camelids, indicating that there is a particle size threshold of about 1 cm in both suborders above which particle retention is not increased. Camelids did not differ from ruminants in MRT(2mm)FS, MRTsoluteFS, and the ratio MRT(2mm)FS/MRTsoluteFS, but they were more similar to 'cattle-' than to 'moose-type' ruminants. Camelids had higher SF(10/2mm)FS and higher SF(20/2mm)FS than ruminants, indicating a potentially slower particle sorting in camelids than in ruminants, with larger particles being retained longer in relation to small particles.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.