ArticleJournal of animal science2024
Diagnostic survey of analytical methods used to determine bone mineralization in pigs.
Article in Journal of animal science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Influence of added 1,25(OH)Translational animal science · 2024Article
- A sustainable nutritional solution for fattening pigs based on 25-hydroxycholecalciferol and triterpenoids added to a low Ca diet containing phytase improves growth performance via the activation of muscle protein synthesis without compromising bone mineralization.Translational animal science · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Pigs from 64 commercial sites across 14 production systems in the Midwest United States were evaluated for baseline biological measurements used to determine bone mineralization. There were three pigs selected from each commercial site representing: 1) a clinically normal pig (healthy), 2) a pig with evidence of clinical lameness (lame), and 3) a pig from a hospital pen that was assumed to have recent low feed intake (unhealthy). Pigs ranged in age from nursery to market weight, with the three pigs sampled from each site representing the same age or phase of production. Blood, urine, metacarpal, fibula, 2nd rib, and 10th rib were collected and analyzed. Each bone was measured for density and ash (defatted and non-defatted technique). A bone × pig type interaction (P < 0.001) was observed for defatted and non-defatted bone ash and density. For defatted bone ash, there were no differences among pig types for the fibulas, 2nd rib, and 10th rib (P > 0.10), but metacarpals from healthy pigs had greater (P < 0.05) percentage bone ash compared to unhealthy pigs, with the lame pigs intermediate. For non-defatted bone ash, there were no differences among pig types for metacarpals and fibulas (P > 0.10), but unhealthy pigs had greater (P < 0.05) non-defatted percentage bone ash for 2nd and 10th ribs compared to healthy pigs, with lame pigs intermediate. Healthy and lame pigs had greater (P < 0.05) bone density than unhealthy pigs for metacarpals and fibulas, with no difference observed for ribs (P > 0.10). Healthy pigs had greater (P < 0.05) serum Ca and 25(OH)D3 compared to unhealthy pigs, with lame pigs intermediate. Healthy pigs had greater (P < 0.05) serum P compared to unhealthy and lame pigs, with no differences between the unhealthy and lame pigs. Unhealthy pigs excreted significantly more (P < 0.05) P and creatinine in the urine compared to healthy pigs with lame pigs intermediate. In summary, there are differences in serum Ca, P, and vitamin D among healthy, lame, and unhealthy pigs. Differences in bone mineralization among pig types varied depending on the analytical procedure and bone, with a considerable range in values within pig type across the 14 production systems sampled.
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.