ArticlePloS one2022
Bioconversion of agro-industrial residues as a protein source supplementation for multiparous Holstein Thai crossbreed cows.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effect of citric waste fermented with yeast waste pellet and roughage-to-concentrate ratio on gas production, digestibility, and fermentation characteristics using an in vitro gas production technique.BMC veterinary research · 2025Article
- In vitro fermentation characteristics, microbial changes and gas production of microencapsulated phytonutrient pellets at varying dietary crude protein levels.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Winged bean tuber as a novel alternative to corn meal in concentrate mixture in Thai native beef cattle diets.BMC veterinary research · 2025Article
- Recycling of Citric Acid Waste for Potential Use as Animal Feed through Fermentation with Lactic Acid Bacteria and a Mixture of Fibrolytic Enzymes.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The purpose of this field study was to compare the effects of top-dressing tropical lactating cows with soybean meal (SBM) or citric waste fermented yeast waste (CWYW) on intake, digestibility, ruminal fermentation, blood metabolites, purine derivatives, milk production, and economic return. Sixteen mid-lactation Thai crossbreeds, Holstein Friesian (16.7 ± 0.30 kg/day milk yield and 490 ± 40.0 kg of initial body weight) were randomly allocated to two treatments in a completed randomized design: SBM as control (n = 8) or CWYW (n = 8). The feeding trial lasted for 60 days plus 21 days for treatment adaptation. The results showed that total dry matter intake, nutrient intake, and digestibility did not (p>0.05) differ between SBM and CWYW top-dressing. Ruminal pH and the protozoal population did not (p>0.05) differ between SBM and CWYW top-dressing. After 4 hours of feeding, CWYW top-dressing showed greater ammonia nitrogen, plasma urea nitrogen, and bacterial population compared with the top-dressing of SBM. Volatile fatty acids and purine derivatives were not different (p>0.05) between SBM and CWYW top-dressing. For milk urea nitrogen, there was a greater (p<0.05) and somatic cell count was lower (p<0.05) for cows fed the CWYW top-dress compared to cows fed the SBM top-dress. The cost of the top-dress and total feed cost were less (p<0.05) for CWYW compared to SBM top-dressing, at 0.59 vs 1.16 US dollars/cow/day and 4.14 vs 4.75 US dollars/cow/day, respectively. In conclusion, CWYW could be used as an alternative protein source to SBM without having a negative impact on tropical lactating cows.
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.