Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34430084›Full record

ArticlePeerJ2021

Wheat litter and feed with aluminosilicates for improved growth and meat quality in broiler chickens.

Mirosław Banaszak, Jakub Biesek, Marek Adamski

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PeerJ, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Mirosław BanaszakDepartment of Animal Breeding and Nutrition, Faculty of Animal Breeding and Biology, UTP -University of Science and Technology in Bydgoszcz, Bydgoszcz, Poland.
Jakub BiesekDepartment of Animal Breeding and Nutrition, Faculty of Animal Breeding and Biology, UTP -University of Science and Technology in Bydgoszcz, Bydgoszcz, Poland.
Marek AdamskiDepartment of Animal Breeding and Nutrition, Faculty of Animal Breeding and Biology, UTP -University of Science and Technology in Bydgoszcz, Bydgoszcz, Poland.
Bydgoszcz University of Science and Technology · PL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNatural minerals have many beneficial properties in poultry production, taking into account production as well as hygiene, health, safety, and quality of broiler meat. The aim of the study was to evaluate the effect of aluminosilicates in feed and litter on the growth performance and meat quality in chickens. Aluminosilicates, including halloysite and zeolite, could be a good alternative for synthetics, as a good solution for the environment in line with the current trends.

methodsFive-hundred male Ross 308 chickens were managed in 5 groups (10 replicates/group): LITTER: 1, control; 2, 0.95 kg/m

resultsBody weight and its gain were higher in groups 3 and 4 than in 1, and feed intake was higher in 4. The weight of the carcass and some of its components, including muscles and skin with subcutaneous fat, were higher in 2-4. Water loss from leg muscles was lower in 4. The content of protein in muscles was significantly higher in 3. The addition of aluminosilicates in feed and litter had a positive effect on the growth performance and some traits of carcasses and meat quality, especially in group 3. Halloysite and zeolite can be used in feed and litter (especially 0.475 kg/m

Indexed as

Body weight gainBreast musclesBroiler chickenHalloysiteRaw material qualityWheat litterZeolite

Identifiers

PMID34430084
PMCPMC8349159
OpenAlexW3190716254

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.