Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38245611›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2024

Digestibility of crude nutrients and minerals in C57Bl/6J and CD1 mice fed a pelleted lab rodent diet.

Linda F Böswald, Dana Matzek, Bastian Popper

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Voluntary Wheel Running an Effective Intervention in the Management of Excessive Food Usage in CD-1 Mice (Journal of the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science : JAALAS · 2024
    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

3 authors.

Linda F BöswaldCore Facility Animal Models, Biomedical Center, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Munich, Germany. linda.boeswald@lmu.de.
Dana MatzekCore Facility Animal Models, Biomedical Center, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Munich, Germany.
Bastian PopperCore Facility Animal Models, Biomedical Center, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Munich, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In laboratory animals, there is a scarcity of digestibility data under non-experimental conditions. Such data is important as basis to generate nutrient requirements, which contributes to the refinement of husbandry conditions. Digestibility trials can also help to identify patterns of absorption and potential factors that influence the digestibility. Thus, a digestibility trial with a pelleted diet used as standard feed in laboratory mice was conducted. To identify potential differences between genetic lines, inbred C57Bl/6 J and outbred CD1 mice (n = 18 each, male, 8 weeks-old, housed in groups of three) were used. For seven days, the feed intake was recorded and the total faeces per cage collected. Energy, crude nutrient and mineral content of diet and faecal samples were analyzed to calculate the apparent digestibility (aD). Apparent dry matter and energy digestibility did not differ between both lines investigated. The C57Bl/6 J mice had significantly higher aD of magnesium and potassium and a trend towards a lower aD of sodium than the mice of the CD1 outbred stock. Lucas-tests were performed to calculate the mean true digestibility of the nutrients and revealed a uniformity of the linear regression over data from both common laboratory mouse lines. The mean true digestibility of crude nutrients was > 90%, except for fibre, that of the minerals ranged between 66 and 97%.

Indexed as

Animal FeedDigestionAnimal Nutritional Physiological PhenomenaAnimalsDietMaleMiceMineralsNutrientsMineralsNutrients

Identifiers

PMID38245611
PMCPMC10799863

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.