Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31513711›Full record

ArticleJournal of animal science2019

Dietary energy sources during late gestation and lactation of sows: effects on performance, glucolipid metabolism, oxidative status of sows, and their offspring1.

Yunyu Yang, Cheng Jun Hu, Xichen Zhao, Kaili Xiao, Ming Deng, Lin Zhang, Xinggang Qiu, Jinping Deng, Yulong Yin, Chengquan Tan

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of animal science, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
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

10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Yunyu YangGuangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition Control, Institute of Subtropical Animal Nutrition and Feed, College of Animal Science, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
Cheng Jun HuGuangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition Control, Institute of Subtropical Animal Nutrition and Feed, College of Animal Science, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
Xichen ZhaoGuangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition Control, Institute of Subtropical Animal Nutrition and Feed, College of Animal Science, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
Kaili XiaoGuangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition Control, Institute of Subtropical Animal Nutrition and Feed, College of Animal Science, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
Ming DengGuangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition Control, Institute of Subtropical Animal Nutrition and Feed, College of Animal Science, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
Lin ZhangGuangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition Control, Institute of Subtropical Animal Nutrition and Feed, College of Animal Science, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
Xinggang QiuCollege of Animal Science and National Engineering Research Center for Breeding Swine Industry, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
Jinping DengGuangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition Control, Institute of Subtropical Animal Nutrition and Feed, College of Animal Science, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
Yulong YinGuangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition Control, Institute of Subtropical Animal Nutrition and Feed, College of Animal Science, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
Chengquan TanGuangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition Control, Institute of Subtropical Animal Nutrition and Feed, College of Animal Science, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
South China Agricultural University · CNGuangdong Food Industry Research Institute · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In this study, the effects of maternal energy sources during late gestation and lactation on the performance, glucolipid metabolism, and oxidative status of sows and their offspring were investigated using a total of 75 (2 to 6 of parity) Landrace × Large White sows at day 85 of gestation under 3 different dietary treatments: SO diet (basal diet plus 3.0% and 5.0% soybean oil during late gestation and lactation, respectively), FO diet (basal diet plus 3.0%/5.0% fish oil during late gestation and lactation, respectively), and CS diet (basal diet plus 32%/42% corn starch during late gestation and lactation, respectively). All the 3 groups showed no obvious differences (P > 0.05) in the number of total piglets born, born alive, after cross-fostering, and at weaning, whereas the CS group exhibited a shorter farrowing duration (P < 0.05) and lower stillbirth rate (P < 0.05) when compared with the SO group. In addition, litter weight at birth was significantly higher in the CS group than in the SO or FO group (P < 0.05). Despite no notable differences in the ADG of suckling piglets among dietary treatments (P > 0.05), the CS group had greater feed intake than the SO group during the lactation period (P < 0.05). In neonatal piglets with normal birth weight (NBW, 1.3 to 1.5 kg), the CS group was lower than the SO group in the content of liver glycogen (P < 0.05) and the mRNA abundances of fatty acid synthase, acetyl-CoA carboxylase, fatty acid-binding protein 1, and acyl-CoA oxidase (P < 0.05). Interestingly, compared with the SO group, the FO group had a lower preweaning mortality rate (P < 0.05), but greater liver glycogen pools (P < 0.05) in neonatal piglets with low birth weight (LBW, <1.1 kg). Compared with the CS group, the FO group showed an increase in the plasma malondialdehyde levels (P < 0.05) of sows, as well as an increase of 8-hydroxy-deoxyguanosine (P < 0.05) and a decrease of ferric reducing ability of plasma (P < 0.05) in NBW piglets. Overall, the diet rich in starch decreased the stillbirth rate and increased the litter weight of neonatal piglets, the dietary supplementation with fish oil decreased preweaning mortality rate, and the diet with a low n6:n3 ratio increased the oxidative status of sows and their offspring.

Indexed as

Energy IntakeAnimal FeedAnimalsAnimals, SucklingDietDietary SupplementsFemaleFish OilsLactationMaternal Nutritional Physiological PhenomenaOxidation-ReductionOxidative StressParityPregnancySoybean OilSwineFish OilsSoybean Oilfish oilglycogenn-3 fatty acidsoxidative stresssowsstarch

Identifiers

PMID31513711
PMCPMC6827407
OpenAlexW2973198794

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.