ArticleJournal of animal science2018
Objective evaluation of female feet and leg joint conformation at time of selection and post first parity in swine1.
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 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Monitoring Pig Structural Soundness and Body Weight in Pork Production Systems Using Computer Vision Approaches.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025Review
- Genetic parameters for image-based estimations of swine feet and leg conformation traits.Journal of animal science · 2025Article
- Enhancement of selectivity, 25-hydroxyvitamin D3 level, alkaline phosphatase activity and reproductive performance in gilts and primiparous sows using 14-epimer of 25-hydroxyvitamin D3.Veterinary and animal science · 2024Article
- Effects of the selection process on malondialdehyde, catalase, superoxide dismutase levels, and the performance of gilts under tropical environmental conditions.Veterinary world · 2023Article
- Improving the Reliability of Scale-Free Image Morphometrics in Applications with Minimally Restrained Livestock Using Projective Geometry and Unsupervised Machine Learning.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Feet and legs of replacement females were objectively evaluated at selection, i.e., approximately 150 d of age (n = 319) and post first parity, i.e., any time after weaning of first litter and before second parturition (n = 277) to 1) compare feet and leg joint angle ranges between selection and post first parity; 2) identify feet and leg joint angle differences between selection and first 3 wk of second gestation; 3) identify feet and leg joint angle differences between farms and gestation days during second gestation; and 4) obtain genetic variance components for conformation angles for the two time points measured. Angles for carpal joint (knee), metacarpophalangeal joint (front pastern), metatarsophalangeal joint (rear pastern), tarsal joint (hock), and rear stance were measured using image analysis software. Between selection and post first parity, significant differences were observed for all joints measured (P < 0.05). Knee, front and rear pastern angles were less (more flexion), and hock angles were greater (less flexion) as age progressed (P < 0.05), while the rear stance pattern was less (feet further under center) at selection than post first parity (only including measures during first 3 wk of second gestation). Only using post first parity leg conformation information, farm was a significant source of variation for front and rear pasterns and rear stance angle measurements (P < 0.05). Knee angle was less (more flexion; P < 0.05) as gestation age progressed. Heritability estimates were low to moderate (0.04-0.35) for all traits measured across time points. Genetic correlations between the same joints at different time points were high (>0.8) between the front leg joints and low (<0.2) between the rear leg joints. High genetic correlations between time points indicate that the trait can be considered the same at either time point, and low genetic correlations indicate that the trait at different time points should be considered as two separate traits. Minimal change in the front leg suggests conformation traits that remain between selection and post first parity, while larger changes in rear leg indicate that rear leg conformation traits should be evaluated at multiple time periods.
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.