Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35804614›Full record

ArticleAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2022

Comparing Blend of Essential Oils Plus 25-Hydroxy-Vit-D3 Versus Monensin Plus Virginiamycin Combination in Finishing Feedlot Cattle: Growth Performance, Dietary Energetics, and Carcass Traits.

Alfredo Estrada-Angulo, Daniel A Mendoza-Cortez, Jorge L Ramos-Méndez, Yesica J Arteaga-Wences, Jesús D Urías-Estrada, Beatriz I Castro-Pérez, Francisco G Ríos-Rincón, Miguel A Rodríguez-Gaxiola, Alberto Barreras, Richard A Zinn and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract 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 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 33% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. A Blend of Essential Oils Plus Vitamin D3 Combined withAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

11 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Alfredo Estrada-AnguloFaculty of Veterinary Medicine and Zootechnics, Autonomous University of Sinaloa, Culiacan 80260, Sinaloa, Mexico.ORCID 0000-0001-9119-5162
Daniel A Mendoza-CortezFaculty of Veterinary Medicine and Zootechnics, Autonomous University of Sinaloa, Culiacan 80260, Sinaloa, Mexico.
Jorge L Ramos-MéndezFaculty of Veterinary Medicine and Zootechnics, Autonomous University of Sinaloa, Culiacan 80260, Sinaloa, Mexico.
Yesica J Arteaga-WencesFaculty of Veterinary Medicine and Zootechnics, Autonomous University of Sinaloa, Culiacan 80260, Sinaloa, Mexico.ORCID 0000-0002-5877-8101
Jesús D Urías-EstradaFaculty of Veterinary Medicine and Zootechnics, Autonomous University of Sinaloa, Culiacan 80260, Sinaloa, Mexico.ORCID 0000-0001-6600-8417
Beatriz I Castro-PérezFaculty of Veterinary Medicine and Zootechnics, Autonomous University of Sinaloa, Culiacan 80260, Sinaloa, Mexico.
Francisco G Ríos-RincónFaculty of Veterinary Medicine and Zootechnics, Autonomous University of Sinaloa, Culiacan 80260, Sinaloa, Mexico.
Miguel A Rodríguez-GaxiolaFaculty of Veterinary Medicine and Zootechnics, Autonomous University of Sinaloa, Culiacan 80260, Sinaloa, Mexico.
Alberto BarrerasVeterinary Science Research Institute, Autonomous University of Baja California, Mexicali 21100, Baja California, Mexico.ORCID 0000-0003-4610-8933
Richard A ZinnAnimal Science Department, University of California, Davis, CA 95616, USA.
Alejandro PlascenciaFaculty of Veterinary Medicine and Zootechnics, Autonomous University of Sinaloa, Culiacan 80260, Sinaloa, Mexico.ORCID 0000-0003-2151-5372
Universidad Autónoma de Sinaloa · MXUniversidad Autónoma de Baja California · MXUniversity of California, Davis · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Ninety crossbreed bulls (349.5 ± 8.25 kg initial weight) were used in an 87day trial to compare the effects of a blend of essential oils plus 25-hydroxy-Vit-D3 (EO + HyD) versus the combination of monensin with virginiamycin (MON + VM) on feedlot growth performance and carcass characteristics. Dietary treatments (nine replicates/treatment) were supplemented with 40 mg/kg diet dry matter of MON + VM (equal parts) or with 120.12 mg/kg diet dry matter of a combination of standardized mixture of essential oils (120 mg) plus 0.12 mg of 25-hydroxy-vitamin-D3 (EO + HyD). There were no treatment effects on dry matter intake (DMI, p = 0.63). However, the coefficient of variation in day-to-day DMI was greater for EO + HyD than for MON + VM (11.4% vs. 3.88%, p = 0.04). There were no treatment effects (p ≥ 0.17) on daily weight gain, gain-to-feed ratio, and estimated dietary net energy. Cattle supplemented with EO + HyD had greater Longissimus muscle area (7.9%, p < 0.01) and estimated retail yield (1.6%, p = 0.03), and tended to have heavier (1.7%, p = 0.10) carcass weight. Differences among treatments in dressing percentage, fat thickness, kidney−pelvic−heart fat, and marbling score were not appreciable (p > 0.10). It is concluded that growth performance response and dietary energetic are similar for finishing cattle supplemented with EO + HyD vs. MON + VM. However, compared with MON + VM, supplementation with EO + HyD during the finishing phase may improve carcass Longissimus area and carcass yield.

Indexed as

carcassessential oilsfeedlot cattlegrowth performancemonensinvirginiamycinvitamin D3

Identifiers

PMID35804614
PMCPMC9265040
OpenAlexW4283777261

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.