Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39757289›Full record

ArticleTropical animal health and production2025

Estimating body weight in Sujiang pigs using artificial neural network, nearest neighbor, and CART algorithms: a comparative study using morphological measurements.

Malik Ergin, Özgür Koşkan

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Tropical animal health and production, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Smarter ways to predict rabbit body weight across multiple breeds.Journal of advanced veterinary and animal research · 2025
    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

2 authors.

Malik ErginFaculty of Agriculture, Department of Animal Science, Isparta University of Applied Sciences, Isparta, Türkiye. malikergin@isparta.edu.tr.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1810-6754
Özgür KoşkanFaculty of Agriculture, Department of Animal Science, Isparta University of Applied Sciences, Isparta, Türkiye.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The objectives of this study were to evaluate different machine learning algorithms for predicting body weight (BW) in Sujiang pigs using the following morphological traits: age, body length (BL), backfat thickness (BFT), chest circumference (CC), body height (BH), chest width (CW), and hip width (HW). Additionally, this study also investigated which machine learning algorithms could accurately and efficiently predict body weight in pigs using a limited set of morphological traits. For this purpose, morphological measurements of 365 mature (180 ± 5 days) Sujiang pigs from the Jiangsu Sujiang Pig Breeding Farm in Taizhou, Jiangsu Province, China were used. The age of the pigs (180 ± 5 days) was also included as a nominal predictor. In total, 218 individual measurements were obtained after data preprocessing. In the Sujiang pig dataset, BW had a significantly positive and high linear relationship with BH, BL, CW, HW, and CC resulting in values of 0.66, 0.72, 0.81, 0.84, and 0.88, respectively (p < 0.01). Artificial neural network (ANN), K-nearest neighbors (KNN), and classification and regression tree (CART) algorithms were used to predict BW. Overall, the ANN algorithm outperformed the other algorithms in this pig dataset according to the goodness of fit criteria of R

Indexed as

AlgorithmsBody WeightNeural Networks, ComputerAnimalsChinaFemaleMachine LearningMaleSus scrofaSwineArtificial neural networkClassification and regression treeK nearest neighborMorphological measurementsSujiang pig

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.