Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33426030›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in veterinary science2020

Identification of Plant Soot as Novel Safe Feed Additive: Evaluation of 90-Day Oral Toxicity and Prenatal Developmental Toxicity in Rats.

Xingyao Pei, Xilong Xiao, Jianling Liao, Linfu Ke, Daowen Li, Shusheng Tang

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in veterinary science, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
0.1field-weighted citation impact, top 52% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Xingyao PeiDepartment of Pharmacology and Toxicology, College of Veterinary Medicine, Agricultural University, Beijing, China.
Xilong XiaoDepartment of Pharmacology and Toxicology, College of Veterinary Medicine, Agricultural University, Beijing, China.
Jianling LiaoFujian Shunchang Tanwawa Biological Technology Co., LTD, Shunchang, China.
Linfu KeFujian Shunchang Tanwawa Biological Technology Co., LTD, Shunchang, China.
Daowen LiTianjin Key Laboratory of Agricultural Animal Breeding and Healthy Husbandry, College of Animal Science and Veterinary Medicine, Tianjin Agricultural University, Tianjin, China.
Shusheng TangDepartment of Pharmacology and Toxicology, College of Veterinary Medicine, Agricultural University, Beijing, China.
China Agricultural University · CNTianjin Agricultural University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Plant soot, as a novel feed additive, could not only improve digestive function but also adsorb mycotoxins and inhibit bacterial infections. The subchronic toxicity and prenatal developmental effects of plant soot were studied for the first time. Our results indicated that there was no subchronic toxicity in the range of 2,000-50,000 mg/kg plant soot added in the feed, and there was no significant difference in reproductive function, embryo development, and teratogenicity between the pregnant rats exposed to 312.5, 1,250, and 5,000 mg/kg plant soot and the control group. The maximum no-observed effect level (NOEL) of supplemental dosage in feed could be set to 50,000 mg/kg, and the maximum intragastric NOEL could be set to 5,000 mg/kg, which preliminarily provided guidance on daily additive amount or clinical protocols for plant soot, as well as promoting the development and application of this harmless antibiotic substitutes.

Indexed as

embryo developmentplant sootreproductivesubchronic toxicityteratogenic

Identifiers

PMID33426030
PMCPMC7793944
OpenAlexW3112059512

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.