Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34061959›Full record

ArticleJournal of animal science2021

Factors affecting performance response of pigs exposed to different challenge models: a multivariate approach.

Lucas A Rodrigues, Felipe N A Ferreira, Matheus O Costa, Michael O Wellington, Daniel A Columbus

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of animal science, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Lucas A RodriguesPrairie Swine Centre, Inc., Saskatoon, SK S7H 5N9, Canada.
Felipe N A FerreiraTechnical Services Department, Agroceres Multimix, Rio Claro, SP 13502-741, Brazil.
Matheus O CostaDepartment of Large Animal Clinical Sciences, Western College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK S7N 5B4, Canada.
Michael O WellingtonDepartment of Animal and Poultry Science, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK S7N 5A8, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-1035-0883
Daniel A ColumbusPrairie Swine Centre, Inc., Saskatoon, SK S7H 5N9, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-3335-6973
University of Saskatchewan · CAUtrecht University · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Factors associated with the severity with which different challenge models (CMs) compromise growth performance in pigs were investigated using hierarchical clustering on principal components (HCPC) analysis. One hundred seventy-eight studies reporting growth performance variables (average daily gain [ADG], average daily feed intake [ADFI], gain:feed [GF], and final body weight [FBW]) of a Control (Ct) vs. a Challenged (Ch) group of pigs using different CMs (enteric [ENT], environmental [ENV], lipopolysaccharide [LPS], respiratory [RES], or sanitary condition [SAN] challenges) were included. Studies were grouped by similarity in performance in three clusters (C1, C2, and C3) by HCPC. The effects of CM, cluster, and sex (males [M], females [F], mixed [Mi]) were investigated. Linear (LRP) and quadratic (QRP) response plateau models were fitted to assess the interrelationships between the change in ADG (∆ADG) and ADFI (∆ADFI) and the duration of challenge. All variables increased from C1 through C3, except for GF, which decreased (P < 0.05). LPS was more detrimental to ADG than ENV, RES, and SAN models (P < 0.05). Furthermore, LPS also lowered GF more than all the other CMs (P < 0.05). The ∆ADG independent of ∆ADFI was significant in LPS and SAN (P < 0.05), showed a trend toward the significance in ENT and RES (P < 0.10), and was not significant in ENV (P > 0.10), while the ∆ADG dependent on ∆ADFI was significant in ENT, ENV, and LPS only (P < 0.05). The critical value of ∆ADFI influencing the ∆ADG was significant in pigs belonging to C1 (P < 0.05) but not C2 or C3 (P > 0.10). The ∆ADG independent of duration post-Ch (irreparable portion of growth) was significant in C1 and C2 pigs, whereas the ∆ADFI independent of duration post-Ch (irreparable portion of feed intake) was significant in C1 pigs only (P < 0.05). Moreover, the time for recovery of ADG and ADFI after Ch was significant in pigs belonging to C1 and C2 (P < 0.05). Control F showed reduced ADG compared with Ct-M, and Ch-F showed reduced ADFI compared with Ch-M (P < 0.05). Moreover, the irreparable portion of ΔADG was 4.8 higher in F (-187.7; P < 0.05) compared with M (-39.1; P < 0.05). There are significant differences in growth performance response to CM based on cluster and sex. Furthermore, bacterial lipopolysaccharide appears to be an appropriate noninfectious model for immune stimulation and growth impairment in pigs.

Indexed as

Animal FeedEatingAnimalsFemaleMaleSwinechallenge modelsfeed intakegrowthmeta-analysisswine

Identifiers

PMID34061959
PMCPMC8269967
OpenAlexW3164119290

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.