Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32318659›Full record

ArticleAnimal models and experimental medicine2020

Chinese herb feed additives improved the growth performance, meat quality, and nutrient digestibility parameters of pigs.

Zhong-Ning Lin, Li Ye, Zhen-Wu Li, Xiu-Sheng Huang, Zheng Lu, You-Quan Yang, Huan-Wei Xing, Jie-Ying Bai, Zhao-Yang Ying

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Animal models and experimental medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed
4.3field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

29 citing papers in PubMed, 49 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Veterinary sciences · 2025
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. DietaryAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2024
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Dietary of different forms ofTranslational animal science · 2024
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

9 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Zhong-Ning LinAgricultural Ecology Institute Fujian Academy of Agricultural Sciences Fujian Engineering and Technology Research Center for Hilly Prataculture Fuzhou P.R. China.
Li YeState Key Laboratory of Pathogen and Biosecurity Beijing Institute of Microbiology and Epidemiology Beijing Key Laboratory of Vector Borne and Natural Focus Infectious Diseases Beijing P.R. China.
Zhen-Wu LiAgricultural Ecology Institute Fujian Academy of Agricultural Sciences Fujian Engineering and Technology Research Center for Hilly Prataculture Fuzhou P.R. China.
Xiu-Sheng HuangAgricultural Ecology Institute Fujian Academy of Agricultural Sciences Fujian Engineering and Technology Research Center for Hilly Prataculture Fuzhou P.R. China.
Zheng LuAgricultural Ecology Institute Fujian Academy of Agricultural Sciences Fujian Engineering and Technology Research Center for Hilly Prataculture Fuzhou P.R. China.
You-Quan YangAgricultural Ecology Institute Fujian Academy of Agricultural Sciences Fujian Engineering and Technology Research Center for Hilly Prataculture Fuzhou P.R. China.
Huan-Wei XingThe Institute of Molecular Medicine Peking University Beijing P.R. China.
Jie-Ying BaiThe Institute of Molecular Medicine Peking University Beijing P.R. China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7339-5301
Zhao-Yang YingAgricultural Ecology Institute Fujian Academy of Agricultural Sciences Fujian Engineering and Technology Research Center for Hilly Prataculture Fuzhou P.R. China.
Fujian Academy of Agricultural Sciences · CNHebei University of Technology · CNInstitute of Microbiology · BYPeking University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSince the use of antibiotics in animal feed has become a critical concern worldwide due to severe threats to human health and environment, we are in need of finding alternatives to antibiotics in pig breeding, maintaining the health of pigs, and getting high-quality pork. As traditional Chinese herbs (TCH) are rich natural resources in China and show great benefits to human health we propose to transfer this abundant resource into animal production industry as additives.

methodsThree groups of Chinese herbs (groups A, B, and C) were used as feed additives in the diet for pigs. In total 32 pigs were arranged in four groups (groups A, B, C, and control group, NC), fed in the same facility, eight pigs (one group) in each colony, free drinking, for 120 days. The feed:gain ratio (F/G), meat quality, total protein, and amino acid concentration of muscle were checked in the experiments.

resultsAfter 120 days of feeding, the feed:gain ratio (F/G) of pigs in groups A, B, and C was decreased 17.56%, 9.31%, and 13.86% compared with NC treatment, respectively. The diets supplemented with Chinese herbs improved meat quality, increased loin eye area (especially group A and C showed significant difference,

conclusionsThe use of Chinese herbal feed additives can reduce the cost of pig breeding and produce high-quality pock. The combination of these effects would contribute to better absorption ability of the intestinal tract and yield a better growth performance.

Indexed as

Chinese herb feed additivegrowth performancemeat qualitypig

Identifiers

PMID32318659
PMCPMC7167239
OpenAlexW3011654820

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.