Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34945484›Full record

ReviewFoods (Basel, Switzerland)2021

Using Microalgae as a Sustainable Feed Resource to Enhance Quality and Nutritional Value of Pork and Poultry Meat.

Cátia F Martins, David M Ribeiro, Mónica Costa, Diogo Coelho, Cristina M Alfaia, Madalena Lordelo, André M Almeida, João P B Freire, José A M Prates

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Foods (Basel, Switzerland), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing 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

37 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. SpirulinaLife (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Assessing the Influence of CumulativeFoods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Review
  19. Review
  20. Review
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

9 authors.

Cátia F MartinsCIISA-Centre for Interdisciplinary Research in Animal Health, Faculdade de Medicina Veterinária, Universidade de Lisboa, 1300-477 Lisbon, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0002-1017-3269
David M RibeiroLEAF-Linking Landscape, Environment, Agriculture and Food, Instituto Superior de Agronomia, Universidade de Lisboa, 1349-017 Lisbon, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0002-0990-7739
Mónica CostaCIISA-Centre for Interdisciplinary Research in Animal Health, Faculdade de Medicina Veterinária, Universidade de Lisboa, 1300-477 Lisbon, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0002-3030-7789
Diogo CoelhoCIISA-Centre for Interdisciplinary Research in Animal Health, Faculdade de Medicina Veterinária, Universidade de Lisboa, 1300-477 Lisbon, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0001-6151-8186
Cristina M AlfaiaCIISA-Centre for Interdisciplinary Research in Animal Health, Faculdade de Medicina Veterinária, Universidade de Lisboa, 1300-477 Lisbon, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0001-8648-2204
Madalena LordeloLEAF-Linking Landscape, Environment, Agriculture and Food, Instituto Superior de Agronomia, Universidade de Lisboa, 1349-017 Lisbon, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0001-6683-6650
André M AlmeidaLEAF-Linking Landscape, Environment, Agriculture and Food, Instituto Superior de Agronomia, Universidade de Lisboa, 1349-017 Lisbon, Portugal.
João P B FreireLEAF-Linking Landscape, Environment, Agriculture and Food, Instituto Superior de Agronomia, Universidade de Lisboa, 1349-017 Lisbon, Portugal.
José A M PratesCIISA-Centre for Interdisciplinary Research in Animal Health, Faculdade de Medicina Veterinária, Universidade de Lisboa, 1300-477 Lisbon, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0003-1032-5987

Funding

Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia PTDC/CTV-NUT/5931/2014Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia SFRH/BD/126198/2016Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia SFRH/BD/143992/2019Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia UIDB/00276/2020Portugal2020 08/SI/3399/2015
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cereal grains and soybean meal are the main feedstuffs used in swine and poultry feeding, two of the most consumed meats and of key relevance to food security worldwide. Such crops are grown mostly in North and South America and transported over large distances creating sustainability concerns and, furthermore, are in direct competition with human nutrition. Alternatives to these ingredients are, thus, a pressing need to ensure the sustainability of swine and poultry production. Microalgae seem to be a viable alternative due to their interesting nutritional composition. The use of different microalgae in monogastric feeding has been addressed by different researchers over the last decade, particularly their use as a supplement, whilst their use as a feed ingredient has been comparatively less studied. In addition, the high production costs of microalgae are a barrier and prevent higher dietary inclusion. Studies on the effect of microalgae on meat quality refer mostly to fatty acid composition, using these either as a functional ingredient or as a feedstuff. Within such a context and in line with such a rationale, in this review we address the current research on the topic of the use of microalgae in poultry and swine nutrition, particularly aspects concerning pork and poultry meat quality and nutritional traits.

Indexed as

meatmicroalgaenutritional qualityporkpoultrysustainability

Identifiers

PMID34945484
PMCPMC8701271

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.