ArticleHeliyon2025
Prediction of slaughter weight with body components and liner body measurement of
Article in Heliyon, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of the study was to determine the relationship between slaughter weight (SW) with body components and liner body measurements and investigate the coefficient of correlation between slaughter weight with body component and liner body measurements to select the best regression equation. Data on liner body measurements (height at wither and at hips, heart girth, body length, height and width of hump, height at fall and hind legs, body sheath height, height at hooks, barrel circumference, width of face, length of face and tail circumference) and slaughter weight of body components (Hot Carcass Weight (HCW), Empty Body Weight (ESW), Internal Offal (IO) and External Offal (EO)) were collected from 62 Hararghe cattle at Haramaya University abattoir. ESW was calculated as SW with less gut contents. Each carcass was split into halves and weighed to estimate HCW. Simple (linear, quadratic) and multiple (linear, quadratic) regression models were used to explore the relationships between SW, and four linear body measurements. Data were analyzed using the procedure of GLM of SAS, 2018, and JMP version 16 of the SAS software. The result of the study revealed that the average SW, HCW, and dressing percentage of Hararghe cattle were 264 ± 3.37 kg, 113 ± 2.16 kg, and 42.87 ± 0.66 %, respectively. There was a significant (P < 0.01) and low to high correlation were observed between SW and liner body measurements with a correlation coefficient (r) ranging from 0.32 to 0.98. Moreover, the SW had significantly (P < 0.001) and positively correlated with HCW (r = 0.60), EBW (r = 0.96), IO (r = 0.75) and EO (r = 0.85). Of all linear body measurements, the heart girth (HG) gave the highest correlation coefficient with SW and fitted best Hararge Cattle SW predicting model in quadratic regression. Addition of a range of other live animal variables (Width of hook (WH), barrel circumference (BC) and Body length (BL)) to heart girth influenced the relationships between morphometric measurements and SW. However, their inclusion in the regression equations did not improve the predictive power of the models. Likewise, SW significantly (p < 0.001) predicted the body components. The accuracy of prediction (R
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.