ArticleScientific reports2022
Connecting nutritional facts with the traditional ranking of ethnobotanically used fodder grasses by local farmers in Central Punjab of Pakistan.
Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The local farmers of Central Punjab, Pakistan have been using indigenous grasses as vital components of ruminant diets, but little is reported about their nutritional potential. Hence this study investigated nutritive potential of a selection of ethnobotanically important fodder grasses. Multiple nutritional parameters (proximate components, fibre fractions), secondary metabolites (phenolics, tannins) and in vitro digestibility values were determined. Furthermore, the legitimacy of ethnobotanical knowledge of local inhabitants about these grasses was also verified. The results suggested that majority (77%) of these grasses can be regarded as good quality fodders because of their high protein (169 g/kg) and good digestibility (457 g/kg) with moderate fibre (≤ 602 g/kg), lignin (≤ 50 g/kg) and secondary metabolites (total phenols ≤ 87 g/kg, total tannins ≤ 78 g/kg, condensed tannins ≤ 61 g/kg). Pearson correlation between nutritional parameters indicated that in vitro digestibility values were positively correlated with crude proteins (IVDMD, r = + 0.83 and IVOMD, r = + 0.83 respectively) and negatively correlated with fibre (NDF, r = - 0.91), ADF, r = - 0.84 and ADL, r = - 0.82) contents. Moreover, a positive relationship was identified between ethnobotanical knowledge and laboratory findings for studied grasses. Spearman correlation test showed that ranking of grasses based on ethnobotanical preferences were highly correlated (r values) with the laboratory results for CP (0.85), NDF (- 0.76), ADF (- 0.72) and ADL (- 0.62). The resilient complementarities between ethnobotanical preferences and nutritive analysis authenticate farmer's traditional knowledge, which needed to be aligned with the corresponding scientific data. Farmers can use these findings for appropriate fodder selection and development of precise supplements for feeding ruminants within a sustainable and economically viable livestock industry for food security.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.