Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38112204›Full record

SynthesisAnimal genetics2024

Insights into the influence of diet and genetics on feed efficiency and meat production in sheep.

Steffimol Rose Chacko Kaitholil, Mark H Mooney, Aurélie Aubry, Faisal Rezwan, Masoud Shirali

Open access · hybridAbstract readMeta-AnalysisReview
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Animal genetics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
12.8field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Steffimol Rose Chacko KaitholilInstitute for Global Food Security, School of Biological Sciences, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, UK.
Mark H MooneyInstitute for Global Food Security, School of Biological Sciences, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, UK.
Aurélie AubryAgri-Food and Biosciences Institute, Hillsborough, UK.
Faisal RezwanDepartment of Computer Science, Aberystwyth University, Aberystwyth, UK.
Masoud ShiraliInstitute for Global Food Security, School of Biological Sciences, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5401-0541
Queen's University Belfast · GBAberystwyth University · GBAgri Food and Biosciences Institute · GB

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/T008776/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Feed costs and carcass yields affect the profitability and sustainability of sheep production. Therefore, it is crucial to select animals with a higher feed efficiency and high-quality meat production. This study focuses on the impact of dietary and genetic factors on production traits such as feed efficiency, carcass quality, and meat quality. Diets promote optimal sheep growth and development and provide sufficient protein can lead to higher-quality meat. However, establishing an optimized production system requires careful consideration and balance of dietary parameters. This includes ensuring adequate protein intake and feeding diets with higher intestinal absorption rates to enhance nutrient absorption in the gut. The study identifies specific genes, such as Callipyge, Calpastatin, and Myostatin, and the presence of causal mutations in these genes, as factors influencing animal growth rates, feed efficiency, and meat fatty acid profiles. Additionally, variants of other reported genes, including PIGY, UCP1, MEF2B, TNNC2, FABP4, SCD, FASN, ADCY8, ME1, CA1, GLIS1, IL1RAPL1, SOX5, SOX6, and IGF1, show potential as markers for sheep selection. A meta-analysis of reported heritability estimates reveals that residual feed intake (0.27 ± 0.07), hot carcass weight (0.26 ± 0.05), dressing percentage (0.23 ± 0.05), and intramuscular fat content (0.45 ± 0.04) are moderately to highly heritable traits. This suggests that these traits are less influenced by environmental factors and could be improved through genetic selection. Additionally, positive genetic correlations exist between body weight and hot carcass weight (0.91 ± 0.06), dressing percentage (0.35 ± 0.15), and shear force (0.27 ± 0.24), indicating that selecting for higher body weight could lead to favorable changes in carcass quality, and meat quality.

Indexed as

DietMeatAnimal FeedAnimalsBody CompositionBody WeightEatingPhenotypeSheepcarcass qualitydietfeed efficiencygeneticsheritabilitymeat qualitysheep

Identifiers

PMID38112204
PMCPMC10952161
OpenAlexW4389950328

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.