Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34924918›Full record

ArticleMammalian biology = Zeitschrift fur Saugetierkunde2021

Preliminary evidence for a forestomach washing mechanism in llamas (

Jean-Michel Hatt, Daryl Codron, Henning Richter, Patrick R Kircher, Jürgen Hummel, Marcus Clauss

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Mammalian biology = Zeitschrift fur Saugetierkunde, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Teeth and the gastrointestinal tract in mammals: when 1 + 1 = 3.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2023
    Review
  2. Article
  3. The Ruminant sorting mechanism protects teeth from abrasives.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2022
    Article
  4. 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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Jean-Michel HattClinic for Zoo Animals, Exotic Pets and Wildlife, Vetsuisse Faculty, University of Zurich, Winterthurerstr. 260, 8057 Zurich, Switzerland.
Daryl CodronDepartment of Zoology and Entomology, University of the Free State, PO Box 339, Bloemfontein, 9300 South Africa.
Henning RichterClinic for Diagnostic Imaging, Vetsuisse Faculty, University of Zurich, Winterthurerstr. 258c, 8057 Zurich, Switzerland.
Patrick R KircherClinic for Diagnostic Imaging, Vetsuisse Faculty, University of Zurich, Winterthurerstr. 258c, 8057 Zurich, Switzerland.
Jürgen HummelRuminant Nutrition, Department of Animal Sciences, University of Goettingen, Kellnerweg 6, 37077 Göttingen, Germany.
Marcus ClaussClinic for Zoo Animals, Exotic Pets and Wildlife, Vetsuisse Faculty, University of Zurich, Winterthurerstr. 260, 8057 Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0003-3841-6207
University of Zurich · CHUniversity of Göttingen · DEUniversity of the Free State · ZA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Dust and grit are ingested by herbivores in their natural habitats along with the plants that represent their selected diet. Among the functions of the rumen, a washing of ingesta from adhering dust and grit has recently been demonstrated. The putative consequence is a less strenuous wear on ruminant teeth by external abrasives during rumination. The same function should theoretically apply to camelids, but has not been investigated so far. We fed six llamas (

Indexed as

CamelidChewingGritPhytolithsRuminantRuminationTooth wear

Identifiers

PMID34924918
PMCPMC8629863
OpenAlexW3168551704

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.