Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38997977›Full record

ReviewAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2024

Food Grinding Behavior: A Review of Causality and Influential Factors.

Hao Tang, Wei-Wei Ge, Wan-Hong Wei, Sheng-Mei Yang, Xin Dai

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

5 authors.

Hao TangCollege of Bioscience and Biotechnology, Yangzhou University, 48 East Wenhui Road, Yangzhou 225009, China.
Wei-Wei GeCollege of Bioscience and Biotechnology, Yangzhou University, 48 East Wenhui Road, Yangzhou 225009, China.
Wan-Hong WeiCollege of Bioscience and Biotechnology, Yangzhou University, 48 East Wenhui Road, Yangzhou 225009, China.ORCID 0000-0003-4877-8922
Sheng-Mei YangCollege of Bioscience and Biotechnology, Yangzhou University, 48 East Wenhui Road, Yangzhou 225009, China.ORCID 0000-0002-7773-7540
Xin DaiCollege of Bioscience and Biotechnology, Yangzhou University, 48 East Wenhui Road, Yangzhou 225009, China.ORCID 0000-0002-1097-5253

Funding

National Natural Science Foundation of China 31971418, 31770422, and 32370438
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Food waste is a common issue arising from grinding of food by experimental animals, leading to excessive food scraps falling into cages. In the wild, animals grind food by gnawing vegetation and seeds, potentially damaging the ecological environment. However, limited ecology studies have focused on food grinding behavior since the last century, with even fewer on rodent food grinding, particularly recently. Although food grinding's function is partially understood, its biological purposes remain under-investigated and driving factors unclear. This review aims to explain potential causes of animal food grinding, identify influencing factors, and discuss contexts and limitations. Specifically, we emphasize recent progress on gut microbiota significance for food grinding. Moreover, we show abnormal food grinding is determined by degree of excess normal behavior, emphasizing food grinding is not meaningless. Findings from this review promote comprehensive research on the myriad factors, multifaceted roles, and intricate evolution underlying food grinding behavior, benefiting laboratory animal husbandry and ecological environment protection, and identifying potential physiological benefits yet undiscovered.

Indexed as

causalityfood grindingfunctionsinfluential factorsrodent

Identifiers

PMID38997977
PMCPMC11240756

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.