Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35739916›Full record

ArticleAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2022

The Effects of Pen Size and Design, Bedding, Rooting Material and Ambient Factors on Pen and Pig Cleanliness and Air Quality in Fattening Pig Houses.

Marko Ocepek, Inger Lise Andersen

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. Article
  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

2 authors.

Marko OcepekDepartment of Animal and Aquacultural Sciences, Faculty of Biosciences, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, 1432 Aas, Norway.ORCID 0000-0002-2823-6387
Inger Lise AndersenDepartment of Animal and Aquacultural Sciences, Faculty of Biosciences, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, 1432 Aas, Norway.

Funding

Nortura SA 296004Norwegian Research Council 296004
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There are several environmental and ambient factors that can affect pig eliminative behaviour. The aim of this survey was to investigate factors related to the physical and ambient environment that have the strongest effects on pig and pen cleanliness and ammonia concentration. Data were collected from 87 pig farms and analysed using mixed (ammonia concentration) or generalized linear (pen and pig cleanliness) model in SAS. The pen was cleaner when pen partitions were open compared to closed (p = 0.010) and increased with increasing amount of litter (p = 0.002), using straw (p = 0.002) as rooting material. Pig cleanliness was higher when pen partitions in the eliminative area were open compared to closed (p = 0.007) and increased with increasing space per pig in the resting area (p < 0.001), with decreasing temperature (p < 0.001), and lowering of air velocity (p = 0.003). Other factors that increased cleanliness was using straw as rooting material (p = 0.028) and increasing amount of litter in the resting area (p = 0.002). Ammonia concentration was reduced with increasing floor space in the eliminative area (p < 0.001) and increasing amount of litter (p = 0.006). Our results pinpoint physical and ambient conditions affecting pen and pig cleanliness and air quality.

Indexed as

air velocityammonia concentrationpen designpig and pen cleanlinessrooting materialtemperature

Identifiers

PMID35739916
PMCPMC9219434

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.