Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39261875›Full record

ArticleJournal of animal science and biotechnology2024

Effects of replacing soybean meal with enzymolysis-fermentation compound protein feed on growth performance, apparent digestibility of nutrients, carcass traits, and meat quality in growing-finishing pigs.

Yu Cheng, Jun He, Ping Zheng, Jie Yu, Junning Pu, Zhiqing Huang, Xiangbing Mao, Yuheng Luo, Junqiu Luo, Hui Yan and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of animal science and biotechnology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

13 authors.

Yu ChengKey Laboratory of Animal Disease-Resistant Nutrition, Ministry of Education, Animal Nutrition Institute, Sichuan Agricultural University, Ya'an, 625014, People's Republic of China.
Jun HeKey Laboratory of Animal Disease-Resistant Nutrition, Ministry of Education, Animal Nutrition Institute, Sichuan Agricultural University, Ya'an, 625014, People's Republic of China.
Ping ZhengKey Laboratory of Animal Disease-Resistant Nutrition, Ministry of Education, Animal Nutrition Institute, Sichuan Agricultural University, Ya'an, 625014, People's Republic of China.
Jie YuKey Laboratory of Animal Disease-Resistant Nutrition, Ministry of Education, Animal Nutrition Institute, Sichuan Agricultural University, Ya'an, 625014, People's Republic of China.
Junning PuKey Laboratory of Animal Disease-Resistant Nutrition, Ministry of Education, Animal Nutrition Institute, Sichuan Agricultural University, Ya'an, 625014, People's Republic of China.
Zhiqing HuangKey Laboratory of Animal Disease-Resistant Nutrition, Ministry of Education, Animal Nutrition Institute, Sichuan Agricultural University, Ya'an, 625014, People's Republic of China.
Xiangbing MaoKey Laboratory of Animal Disease-Resistant Nutrition, Ministry of Education, Animal Nutrition Institute, Sichuan Agricultural University, Ya'an, 625014, People's Republic of China.
Yuheng LuoKey Laboratory of Animal Disease-Resistant Nutrition, Ministry of Education, Animal Nutrition Institute, Sichuan Agricultural University, Ya'an, 625014, People's Republic of China.
Junqiu LuoKey Laboratory of Animal Disease-Resistant Nutrition, Ministry of Education, Animal Nutrition Institute, Sichuan Agricultural University, Ya'an, 625014, People's Republic of China.
Hui YanKey Laboratory of Animal Disease-Resistant Nutrition, Ministry of Education, Animal Nutrition Institute, Sichuan Agricultural University, Ya'an, 625014, People's Republic of China.
Aimin WuKey Laboratory of Animal Disease-Resistant Nutrition, Ministry of Education, Animal Nutrition Institute, Sichuan Agricultural University, Ya'an, 625014, People's Republic of China.
Bing YuKey Laboratory of Animal Disease-Resistant Nutrition, Ministry of Education, Animal Nutrition Institute, Sichuan Agricultural University, Ya'an, 625014, People's Republic of China. ybingtian@163.com.
Daiwen ChenKey Laboratory of Animal Disease-Resistant Nutrition, Ministry of Education, Animal Nutrition Institute, Sichuan Agricultural University, Ya'an, 625014, People's Republic of China. dwchen@sicau.edu.cn.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8351-7421

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAddressing the shortage of high-quality protein resources, this study was conducted to investigate the effects of replacing soybean meal (SBM) with different levels of enzymolysis-fermentation compound protein feed (EFCP) in the diets of growing-finishing pigs, focusing on growth performance, nutrients digestibility, carcass traits, and meat quality.

methodsSixty DLY (Duroc × Landrace × Yorkshire) pigs with an initial body weight of 42.76 ± 2.05 kg were assigned to 5 dietary treatments in a 2 × 2 + 1 factorial design. These dietary treatments included a corn-soybean meal diet (CON), untreated compound protein feed (UCP) substitution 50% (U50) and 100% SBM (U100) diets, and EFCP substitution 50% (EF50) and 100% SBM (EF100) diets. Each treatment had 6 pens (replicates) with 2 pigs per pen, and the experiment lasted 58 d, divided into phase I (1-28 d) and phase II (29-58 d). Following phase I, only the CON, U50, and EF50 groups were continued for phase II, each with 5 replicate pens. On d 59, a total of 15 pigs (1 pig/pen, 5 pens/treatment) were euthanized.

resultsDuring phase I, the EF50 group had a higher average daily gain (ADG) in pigs (P < 0.05) compared to the CON group, whereas the U50 group did not have a significant difference. As the substitution ratio of UCP and EFCP increased in phase I, there was a noticeable reduction in the final body weight and ADG (P < 0.05), along with an increase in the feed-to-gain ratio (F/G) (P < 0.05). In phase II, there were no significant differences in growth performance among the treatment groups, but EF50 increased the apparent digestibility of several nutrients (including dry matter, crude protein, crude fiber, acid detergent fiber, ash, gross energy) compared to U50. The EF50 group also exhibited significantly higher serum levels of neuropeptide Y and ghrelin compared to the CON and U50 groups (P < 0.05). Moreover, the EF50 group had higher carcass weight and carcass length than those in the CON and U50 groups (P < 0.05), with no significant difference in meat quality.

conclusionsThe study findings suggest that replacing 50% SBM with EFCP during the growing-finishing period can improve the growth performance, nutrient digestibility, and carcass traits of pigs without compromising meat quality. This research offers valuable insights into the modification of unconventional plant protein meals and developing alternatives to SBM.

Indexed as

Compound protein feedEnzymolysis-fermentationGrowing-finishing pigsGrowth performanceNutrient digestibility

Identifiers

PMID39261875
PMCPMC11391718

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.