Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35268226›Full record

ArticleAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2022

Piglet Morphology: Indicators of Neonatal Viability?

Bryony S Tucker, Kiro R Petrovski, Jessica R Craig, Rebecca S Morrison, Robert J Smits, Roy N Kirkwood

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. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. 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.

Bryony S TuckerSchool of Animal and Veterinary Sciences, The University of Adelaide, Roseworthy, SA 5371, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-2026-2070
Kiro R PetrovskiSchool of Animal and Veterinary Sciences, The University of Adelaide, Roseworthy, SA 5371, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-4016-2576
Jessica R CraigResearch and Innovation, Rivalea Australia Pty Ltd., Corowa, NSW 2646, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-0707-6492
Rebecca S MorrisonResearch and Innovation, Rivalea Australia Pty Ltd., Corowa, NSW 2646, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-8412-4945
Robert J SmitsResearch and Innovation, Australian Pork Limited, Barton, ACT 2600, Australia.
Roy N KirkwoodSchool of Animal and Veterinary Sciences, The University of Adelaide, Roseworthy, SA 5371, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-3294-8301

Funding

Australian Pork (Australia) 2018/0086Australian Pork (Australia) APL Project 2018/0086
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The morphological measures, crown-to-rump length (CR), and abdominal circumference (AC) have been suggested to be as good, if not better, than birth weight for predicting piglet performance. We explored the relationships between CR and AC, and piglet weights at birth and 24 h, to investigate their predictive value for piglet survival. Piglet weight and AC at birth and 24 h, and CR at 24 h were recorded for 373 piglets born to 31 sows. Morphological measures were categorised into two levels for weight and three levels for AC and CR. Further, AC and CR groupings were concatenated to create a new variable (PigProp) to describe the proportionality of piglet morphology. Proportionate piglets had equal CR and AC levels, and disproportionate piglets had contrasting levels. Birth AC was a good predictor of colostrum intake (p < 0.001) when accounting for birth weight, but 24 h weight and PigProp were good indicators of actual colostrum intake (p < 0.001 for both). The significant interaction of colostrum and PigProp showed that within the smaller piglet groups, those who had greater than 200 g of colostrum had higher 24 h weight and survival (p < 0.001 both). As expected, as body weight and colostrum intake increased, so did weight change to d 21 (P = 0.03 and trend at p = 0.1, respectively). A similar pattern was seen with increasing PigProp group (p < 0.001); however, piglets from the disproportionate group 1,3 had the greatest observed weight change (5.15 ± 0.06 kg). Our data show morphological measures may be more predictive of piglet viability in terms of both performance and survival than weight and there may be subgroups that have higher than expected chances of survival.

Indexed as

abdominal circumferencecrown-to-rump lengthlow birthweightpigletspre-weaning survivalproportion

Identifiers

PMID35268226
PMCPMC8909469

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.