ArticleJournal of animal science2018
Effect of high doses of Natuphos E 5,000 G phytase on growth performance of nursery pigs.
Article in Journal of animal science, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Dose of phytase from eitherTranslational animal science · 2024Article
- Nutritional and Functional Roles of Phytase and Xylanase Enhancing the Intestinal Health and Growth of Nursery Pigs and Broiler Chickens.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2022Review
- Effect of high-phytase supplementation in lactation diets on sow and litter performance.Translational animal science · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A total of 360 pigs (DNA 200 × 400, initially 5.9 ± 0.1 kg) were used in a 42 d trial to determine the effect of high doses of a recently available phytase source (Natuphos E 5000 G, BASF Corporation, Florham Park, NJ) on nursery pig growth and bone ash. Pigs were randomly allotted to pens at weaning by BW and pens were allotted to one of eight corn-soybean meal-based dietary treatments in a randomized complete block design. There were five pigs per pen and nine pens per treatment. Diets were fed in three phases (d 0 to 7, 7 to 21, and 21 to 42) with formulated total calcium:phosphorus (Ca:P) of 1.07, 1.05, and 0.93, respectively. Treatments included a negative control (NC) with 0.40, 0.30, or 0.25% aP from monocalcium P for Phases 1, 2, and 3 respectively; and NC with either 500, 1,000, 2,000, 3,000, or 4,000 FTU/kg phytase. The last two treatments were a positive control (PC) with 0.55, 0.45, or 0.40% aP from monocalcium P for Phases 1, 2, and 3, respectively, or PC with 2,000 FTU/kg phytase. The NC diet with 500 FTU/kg and PC without added phytase were formulated to be equivalent in available Ca and P. On d 42, one pig per pen was euthanized and the right fibula was removed for bone ash analysis. From d 0 to 42, pigs fed increasing phytase in the NC tended to have increased (quadratic, P = 0.064) ADG and (linear, P = 0.082) ending BW and had improved (quadratic, P = 0.008) G:F. Adding 2,000 FTU/kg phytase to the PC did not influence ADG or ADFI, but tended to improve (P = 0.060) G:F compared with the PC. In addition, percentage bone ash increased as phytase increased in the NC (linear, P < 0.001) or when 2,000 FTU/kg was added to the PC diets (P < 0.001). Pigs fed the PC had increased (P = 0.007) ADFI and tended to have greater (P = 0.099) percentage bone ash than pigs fed NC+500 FTU/kg phytase, but the pigs fed NC+500 FTU/kg phytase had improved (P = 0.032) G:F compared to pigs fed the PC. In summary, increasing concentrations of dietary phytase in a P-deficient diet improved growth and bone ash measurements, and was optimized at 1,000 FTU/kg. There were varied improvements when 2,000 FTU/kg phytase was added in P adequate diets.
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.