Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35268201›Full record

ArticleAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2022

Effects of Dietary Rapeseed and Camelina Seed Cakes on Physical-Technological Properties of Goose Meat.

Violeta Razmaitė, Artūras Šiukščius, Giedrius Šarauskas

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 2022. 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
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

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

3 authors.

Violeta RazmaitėAnimal Science Institute, Lithuanian University of Health Sciences, R. Žebenkos 12, LT-82317 Baisogala, Lithuania.ORCID 0000-0001-9006-5761
Artūras ŠiukščiusAnimal Science Institute, Lithuanian University of Health Sciences, R. Žebenkos 12, LT-82317 Baisogala, Lithuania.ORCID 0000-0001-9064-6216
Giedrius ŠarauskasAnimal Science Institute, Lithuanian University of Health Sciences, R. Žebenkos 12, LT-82317 Baisogala, Lithuania.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The objective of the present study was to investigate the effects of commercial diet supplemented with rapeseed and camelina seed cakes on the physical and technological attributes of goose meat quality. The breast and thigh muscles from thirty geese of both sexes of the Lithuanian native breed Vištinės fed the diet containing either rapeseed cake (group 1) or camelina cake (group 2) at the age of 13 weeks were used for the evaluation of physical and technological attributes. The diet did not affect the colour of goose meat; however, females showed higher (p < 0.05) values of breast yellowness (b*) and hue angle (h). The camelina group demonstrated higher (p < 0.001) cooking losses of breast and thigh muscles and also higher (p < 0.05) EZ drip loss and thawing loss of thigh muscles compared with the rapeseed group. Females had higher (p < 0.05) cooking loss of the breast, whereas males had higher (p < 0.05) cooking loss of the thigh. The growth rate of geese and their slaughter time showed an effect (p < 0.05 and p < 0.01, respectively) on pH of thigh muscles. Higher (p < 0.01) hardness of the breast muscle in the camelina group compared with the rapeseed group was detected by the texture profile analysis (TPA) as well as other parameters such as cohesiveness and gumminess, chewiness. Despite some differences in technological meat quality attributes, the quality of goose meat produced with diet supplementation of 10% of rapeseed cake and camelina seed cake can be considered as suitable.

Indexed as

colourgooselocal breedmeatmoisturequality propertiestexture

Identifiers

PMID35268201
PMCPMC8909784

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.