Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32637096›Full record

ArticleJournal of animal science and biotechnology2020

Estimate of the energy value of soybean meal relative to corn based on growth performance of nursery pigs.

Henrique S Cemin, Hayden E Williams, Mike D Tokach, Steve S Dritz, Jason C Woodworth, Joel M DeRouchey, Robert D Goodband, Kyle F Coble, Brittany A Carrender, Mandy J Gerhart

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of animal science and biotechnology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Methodologies for energy evaluation of pig and poultry feeds: A review.Animal nutrition (Zhongguo xu mu shou yi xue hui) · 2022
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. 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

10 authors.

Henrique S CeminDepartment of Animal Sciences and Industry, College of Agriculture, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS 66506 USA.
Hayden E WilliamsDepartment of Animal Sciences and Industry, College of Agriculture, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS 66506 USA.
Mike D TokachDepartment of Animal Sciences and Industry, College of Agriculture, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS 66506 USA.
Steve S DritzDepartment of Diagnostic Medicine/Pathobiology, College of Veterinary Medicine, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS 66506 USA.
Jason C WoodworthDepartment of Animal Sciences and Industry, College of Agriculture, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS 66506 USA.
Joel M DeRoucheyDepartment of Animal Sciences and Industry, College of Agriculture, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS 66506 USA.
Robert D GoodbandDepartment of Animal Sciences and Industry, College of Agriculture, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS 66506 USA.ORCID 0000-0001-8879-1094
Kyle F CobleJBS USA, Greeley, CO 80634 USA.
Brittany A CarrenderJBS USA, Greeley, CO 80634 USA.
Mandy J GerhartJBS USA, Greeley, CO 80634 USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTwo experiments were conducted to determine the effects of increasing amounts of soybean meal (SBM) in swine diets and estimate the energy value of SBM.

methodsA total of 2233 pigs (PIC 337 × 1050, Hendersonville, TN) and 3796 pigs (PIC 359 × C40), initially 11.0 kg and 17.6 kg body weight (BW), were used in Exp. 1 and 2, respectively. In Exp. 1, pigs were placed in 92 pens each containing 20 to 27 pigs. In Exp. 2, pigs were placed in 84 pens each containing 37 to 43 pigs. Treatments were assigned in a randomized complete block design with BW as the blocking factor. Dietary treatments consisted of 21%, 27%, 33%, or 39% SBM in Exp. 1 and 17.5%, 22%, 26.5%, 31%, 35.5%, or 40% SBM in Exp. 2, obtained by changing the inclusion rate of feed-grade amino acids and corn grain. For Exp. 1, representative samples of corn grain, SBM, and distillers dried grains with solubles were analyzed for total AA content prior to diet formulation. For Exp. 2, diets were formulated using NRC (2012) nutrient loadings. Treatment diets were fed for 21 and 22 d (Exp. 1 and 2) and there were 23 replicates in Exp. 1 and 14 replicates in Exp. 2. Pigs were weighed and feed disappearance measured weekly to calculate average daily gain (ADG), average daily feed intake (ADFI), gain-to-feed ratio (G:F), and caloric efficiency (CE). Data were analyzed with block as a random effect and treatment as a fixed effect, and contrasts were constructed to test the linear and quadratic effects of increasing SBM.

resultsIn Exp. 1, there was a tendency (linear,

conclusionsThe results suggest that feeding increasing levels of SBM improves G:F and CE. The energy value of SBM was estimated to be between 105% and 125% of corn, which is much greater than the NRC (2012) would indicate.

Indexed as

Caloric efficiencyEnergySoybean mealSwine

Identifiers

PMID32637096
PMCPMC7333266

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.