ArticleAnimal : an international journal of animal bioscience2020
Evaluating environmental impacts of selection for residual feed intake in pigs.
Article in Animal : an international journal of animal bioscience, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 42 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
- Genetic parameters for feed efficiency, growth performance, and feeding behaviors traits in Canadian Duroc pigs.Journal of animal science · 2026Article
- ASAS-NANP symposium: mathematical modeling in animal nutrition: contributions of mathematical modeling to life cycle assessment to support environmental sustainability of animal production.Journal of animal science · 2026Review
- Genome-wide association studies for feed efficiency, production and feeding behavior traits in Canadian purebred Duroc pigs.Journal of animal science · 2026Article
- Investigation of Mechanism of Small Peptide Application in Enhancing Laying Performance of Late-Laying Hens Through Bidirectional Liver-Gut Interactions.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026Article
- Transcriptome analysis of liver and ileum reveals potential regulation of long non-coding RNA in pigs with divergent feed efficiency.Animal bioscience · 2025Article
- Opportunities to improve environmental sustainability of pork production through genetics.Journal of animal science · 2025Review
- The effects of PRRS on the environmental impact of pig production: a life cycle assessment study.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2025Article
- Insight into the Gut-Brain Axis and the Productive Performance and Egg Quality Response toAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2024Article
- A Life Cycle Assessment Study of the Impacts of Pig Breeding on the Environmental Sustainability of Pig Production.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2024Article
- Comparative Serum Proteome Analysis Indicates a Negative Correlation between a Higher Immune Level and Feed Efficiency in Pigs.Veterinary sciences · 2023Article
- Metagenomic insights into the relationship between gut microbiota and residual feed intake of small-sized meat ducks.Frontiers in microbiology · 2022Article
- Polymorphisms inFrontiers in veterinary science · 2022Article
- Identification of genomic regions affecting production traits in pigs divergently selected for feed efficiency.Genetics, selection, evolution : GSE · 2021Article
- Economic and environmental assessments of combined genetics and nutrition optimization strategies to improve the efficiency of sustainable pork production.Journal of animal science · 2021Article
- Environmental Impacts and Their Association With Performance and Excretion Traits in Growing Pigs.Frontiers in veterinary 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
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To identify a proper strategy for future feed-efficient pig farming, it is required to evaluate the ongoing selection scenarios. Tools are lacking for the evaluation of pig selection scenarios in terms of environmental impacts to provide selection guidelines for a more sustainable pig production. Selection on residual feed intake (RFI) has been proposed to improve feed efficiency and potentially reduce the associated environmental impacts. The aim of this study was thus to develop a model to account for individual animal performance in life cycle assessment (LCA) methods to quantify the responses to selection. Experimental data were collected from the fifth generation of pig lines divergently selected for RFI (low line, more efficient pigs, LRFI; high line, less efficient pigs, HRFI). The average feed conversion ratio (FCR) and daily feed intake of LRFI pigs were 7% lower than the average of HRFI pigs (P < 0.0001). A parametric model was developed for LCA based on the dietary net energy fluxes in a pig system. A nutritional pig growth tool, InraPorc®, was included as a module in the model to embed flexibility for changes in feed composition, animal performance traits and housing conditions and to simulate individual pig performance. The comparative individual-based LCA showed that LRFI had an average of 7% lower environmental impacts per kilogram live pig at farm gate compared to HRFI (P < 0.0001) on climate change, acidification potential, freshwater eutrophication potential, land occupation and water depletion. High correlations between FCR and all environmental impact categories (>0.95) confirmed the importance of improvement in feed efficiency to reduce environmental impacts. Significant line differences in all impact categories and moderate correlations with impacts (>0.51) revealed that RFI is an effective measure to select for improved environmental impacts, despite lower correlations compared to FCR. Altogether more optimal criteria for efficient environment-friendly selection can then be expected through restructuring the selection indexes from an environmental point of view.
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.