ArticleJournal of animal science2024
Effect of different feeding strategies and dietary fiber levels on energy and protein retention in gestating sows.
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.
- Determination of the Available Energy of Corn DDGS Fed to Pregnant Sows.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025Article
- Dietary fibre supplementation in late gestation modulates gut microbiota and improves reproductive performance and colostrum quality in sows.Frontiers in microbiology · 2025Article
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 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of the study was to investigate whether increased inclusion of sugar beet pulp (SBP) alters retention of fat, protein, and energy when backfat (BF) is restored in early- and mid-gestation. In total, 46 sows were fed one of four dietary treatments with increasing inclusion of SBP providing dietary fiber (DF) levels of 119, 152, 185, and 217 g/kg; sows were assigned to one of three feeding strategies (FS; high, medium, and low) depending on BF thickness at mating and again at day 30 for the following month. On days 0, 30, 60, and 108, body weight (BW) and BF thickness were measured and body pools of protein and fat were estimated using the deuterium oxide technique. On days 30 and 60, urine, feces, and blood samples were collected to quantify metabolites, energy, and nitrogen (N) balances. On days 15 and 45, heart rate was recorded to estimate heat energy. At farrowing, total born and weight of the litter were recorded. In early gestation, BW gain (P < 0.01) and body protein retention increased (P < 0.05) with increasing fiber inclusion, while body fat retention increased numerically by 59%. The increase in BF was greatest for sows fed the high FS, intermediate when fed the medium strategy, and negligible for sows fed the lowest FS (P < 0.001). Nitrogen intake, N loss in feces, and N balance increased linearly, whereas N loss in urine tended to decrease with increasing inclusion of fibers in early gestation. Concomitantly, fecal energy output and energy lost as methane increased linearly (P < 0.001), while energy output in urine declined linearly. Total metabolizable energy (ME) intake therefore increased from 36.5 MJ ME/d in the low fiber group to 38.5 MJ ME/d in the high fiber group (P < 0.01). Changing the ME towards more ketogenic energy was expected to favor fat retention rather than protein retention. However, due to increased intake of ME and increased N efficiency with increasing fiber inclusion, the sows gained more weight and protein with increasing fiber inclusion. In conclusion, increased feed intake improved both fat and protein retention, whereas increased DF intake increased protein retention.
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.