Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30169713›Full record

ArticleJournal of animal science2018

Transcriptome changes provide genetic insights into the effects of rearing systems on chicken welfare and product quality.

Hai Xiang, Siyu Chen, Hui Zhang, Xu Zhu, Dan Wang, Huagui Liu, Jikun Wang, Tao Yin, Langqing Liu, Minghua Kong and 3 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract readComparative Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

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 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 19% of its field
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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
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

13 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Hai XiangSchool of Life Science and Engineering, Foshan University, Foshan, China.
Siyu ChenNational Engineering Laboratory for Animal Breeding, Key Laboratory of Animal Genetics, Breeding and Reproduction, Ministry of Agriculture, College of Animal Science and Technology, China Agricultural University, Beijing, China.
Hui ZhangNational Engineering Laboratory for Animal Breeding, Key Laboratory of Animal Genetics, Breeding and Reproduction, Ministry of Agriculture, College of Animal Science and Technology, China Agricultural University, Beijing, China.
Xu ZhuNational Engineering Laboratory for Animal Breeding, Key Laboratory of Animal Genetics, Breeding and Reproduction, Ministry of Agriculture, College of Animal Science and Technology, China Agricultural University, Beijing, China.
Dan WangNational Engineering Laboratory for Animal Breeding, Key Laboratory of Animal Genetics, Breeding and Reproduction, Ministry of Agriculture, College of Animal Science and Technology, China Agricultural University, Beijing, China.
Huagui LiuInstitute of Animal Husbandry and Veterinary Medicine, Beijing Academy of Agriculture and Forestry Sciences, Beijing, China.
Jikun WangKey Laboratory of Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau Animal Genetic Resource Reservation and Utilization, Ministry of Education, Institute of Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau, Southwest University for Nationalities, Chengdu, China.
Tao YinNational Engineering Laboratory for Animal Breeding, Key Laboratory of Animal Genetics, Breeding and Reproduction, Ministry of Agriculture, College of Animal Science and Technology, China Agricultural University, Beijing, China.
Langqing LiuNational Engineering Laboratory for Animal Breeding, Key Laboratory of Animal Genetics, Breeding and Reproduction, Ministry of Agriculture, College of Animal Science and Technology, China Agricultural University, Beijing, China.
Minghua KongNational Engineering Laboratory for Animal Breeding, Key Laboratory of Animal Genetics, Breeding and Reproduction, Ministry of Agriculture, College of Animal Science and Technology, China Agricultural University, Beijing, China.
Jian ZhangInstitute of Animal Husbandry and Veterinary Medicine, Beijing Academy of Agriculture and Forestry Sciences, Beijing, China.
Hua LiSchool of Life Science and Engineering, Foshan University, Foshan, China.
Xingbo ZhaoSchool of Life Science and Engineering, Foshan University, Foshan, China.
China Agricultural University · CNBeijing Academy of Agricultural and Forestry Sciences · CNFoshan University · CNSouthwest Minzu University · CNTohoku University · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Farm animals raised under free-range (FR) systems are assumed to have improved welfare and higher-quality products that are better to eat than intensively reared animals. However, the modulations are limited in scientific investigations. In this study, we compared 2 rearing systems (FR and cage) and their effects on chickens, including production performance, product quality, body condition, physiological indicators, and gene expression. By using a match-mismatch design in which each treatment was transferred to the other treatment during the last period of the experiment, we aimed to understand the influence of current and former rearing conditions and the ability of individuals to adapt to the current environment. The results indicated that the FR system led to better chicken welfare (e.g., gait score, feather condition, and physiological indicators, P < 0.05) and contributed to higher product quality (P < 0.05), although it resulted in poorer production performance (P < 0.05) and foot pad condition (P < 0.05) than that of the cage rearing system. Additionally, the FR system triggered a series of inner changes and genetic responses in chickens, such as the upregulation of calcium and GnRH signaling, actin and cytoskeleton regulations, immune functions, and developmental processes, and the downregulation of pathological regulations (q-value < 0.05 for all gene ontology terms and P < 0.05 for all Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG) pathways). In conclusion, rearing systems alter chicken gene expression patterns, which provide a genetic basis for the adaptability to rearing environments and ultimately affects chicken welfare and products.

Indexed as

Animal WelfareTranscriptomeAnimal HusbandryAnimalsChickensEggsHousing, AnimalPoultry

Identifiers

PMID30169713
PMCPMC6247852
OpenAlexW2889417183

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.