Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28118862›Full record

ReviewAnimal : an international journal of animal bioscience2017

Review: divergent selection for residual feed intake in the growing pig.

H Gilbert, Y Billon, L Brossard, J Faure, P Gatellier, F Gondret, E Labussière, B Lebret, L Lefaucheur, N Le Floch and 11 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Animal : an international journal of animal bioscience, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 63 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
63citing 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

63 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Bayesian Genome-Wide Association Study of Feed Efficiency Traits in Pigs.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Livestock species as emerging models for genomic imprinting.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2024
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. PlasmaScientific reports · 2023
    Article

3 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

21 authors.

H Gilbert1GenPhySE,INRA,INP,ENSAT,Université de Toulouse,31326 Castanet-Tolosan,France.
Y Billon2GenESI,INRA,17700 Surgères,France.
L Brossard3PEGASE,INRA,Agrocampus Ouest,35590 Saint-Gilles,France.
J Faure3PEGASE,INRA,Agrocampus Ouest,35590 Saint-Gilles,France.
P Gatellier4QuaPA,INRA,63122 Saint Genès-Champanelle,France.
F Gondret3PEGASE,INRA,Agrocampus Ouest,35590 Saint-Gilles,France.
E Labussière3PEGASE,INRA,Agrocampus Ouest,35590 Saint-Gilles,France.
B Lebret3PEGASE,INRA,Agrocampus Ouest,35590 Saint-Gilles,France.
L Lefaucheur3PEGASE,INRA,Agrocampus Ouest,35590 Saint-Gilles,France.
N Le Floch3PEGASE,INRA,Agrocampus Ouest,35590 Saint-Gilles,France.
I Louveau3PEGASE,INRA,Agrocampus Ouest,35590 Saint-Gilles,France.
E Merlot3PEGASE,INRA,Agrocampus Ouest,35590 Saint-Gilles,France.
M-C Meunier-Salaün3PEGASE,INRA,Agrocampus Ouest,35590 Saint-Gilles,France.
L Montagne3PEGASE,INRA,Agrocampus Ouest,35590 Saint-Gilles,France.
P Mormede1GenPhySE,INRA,INP,ENSAT,Université de Toulouse,31326 Castanet-Tolosan,France.
D Renaudeau3PEGASE,INRA,Agrocampus Ouest,35590 Saint-Gilles,France.
J Riquet1GenPhySE,INRA,INP,ENSAT,Université de Toulouse,31326 Castanet-Tolosan,France.
C Rogel-Gaillard5GABI,INRA,AgroParisTech,Université Paris-Saclay,78350 Jouy-en-Josas Cedex,France.
J van Milgen3PEGASE,INRA,Agrocampus Ouest,35590 Saint-Gilles,France.
A Vincent3PEGASE,INRA,Agrocampus Ouest,35590 Saint-Gilles,France.
J Noblet3PEGASE,INRA,Agrocampus Ouest,35590 Saint-Gilles,France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This review summarizes the results from the INRA (Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique) divergent selection experiment on residual feed intake (RFI) in growing Large White pigs during nine generations of selection. It discusses the remaining challenges and perspectives for the improvement of feed efficiency in growing pigs. The impacts on growing pigs raised under standard conditions and in alternative situations such as heat stress, inflammatory challenges or lactation have been studied. After nine generations of selection, the divergent selection for RFI led to highly significant (P<0.001) line differences for RFI (-165 g/day in the low RFI (LRFI) line compared with high RFI line) and daily feed intake (-270 g/day). Low responses were observed on growth rate (-12.8 g/day, P<0.05) and body composition (+0.9 mm backfat thickness, P=0.57; -2.64% lean meat content, P<0.001) with a marked response on feed conversion ratio (-0.32 kg feed/kg gain, P<0.001). Reduced ultimate pH and increased lightness of the meat (P<0.001) were observed in LRFI pigs with minor impact on the sensory quality of the meat. These changes in meat quality were associated with changes of the muscular energy metabolism. Reduced maintenance energy requirements (-10% after five generations of selection) and activity (-21% of time standing after six generations of selection) of LRFI pigs greatly contributed to the gain in energy efficiency. However, the impact of selection for RFI on the protein metabolism of the pig remains unclear. Digestibility of energy and nutrients was not affected by selection, neither for pigs fed conventional diets nor for pigs fed high-fibre diets. A significant improvement of digestive efficiency could likely be achieved by selecting pigs on fibre diets. No convincing genetic or blood biomarker has been identified for explaining the differences in RFI, suggesting that pigs have various ways to achieve an efficient use of feed. No deleterious impact of the selection on the sow reproduction performance was observed. The resource allocation theory states that low RFI may reduce the ability to cope with stressors, via the reduction of a buffer compartment dedicated to responses to stress. None of the experiments focussed on the response of pigs to stress or challenges could confirm this theory. Understanding the relationships between RFI and responses to stress and energy demanding processes, as such immunity and lactation, remains a major challenge for a better understanding of the underlying biological mechanisms of the trait and to reconcile the experimental results with the resource allocation theory.

Indexed as

Body CompositionEnergy MetabolismReproductionAnimal FeedAnimalsDietDigestionLactationNutritional RequirementsPhenotypeRed MeatSwinefeed efficiencygeneticspigresidual feed intakeselection

Identifiers

PMID28118862
PMCPMC5561440

What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.