ArticleScientific reports2025
Evaluation of forage yield and nutritive value of lesser burnet genotypes.
Article in Scientific reports, 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.
- A review for nutritional value ofFrontiers in veterinary science · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study aimed to compare 46 different lesser burnet (Sanguisorba minor) genotypes collected from nature in various cities of Turkey regarding yield and hay quality traits and to select superior and high-quality genotypes. For this purpose, lesser burnet genotypes were grown in 2018-2019 according to the randomized block design with 3 replications. In the study, the difference between the genotypes was statistically very significant in terms of all traits examined. (P ≤ 0.01). According to the obtained results, herbage yield varied between 3737 and 18,182 kg/ha, hay yield varied between 1713 and 5777 kg/ha, protein yield varied between 190 and 823 kg/ha, ADF varied between 29.08 and 39.89%, NDF varied between 33.96 and 55.81%, crude oil varied between 0.41 and 2.65%, crude ash varied between 5.56 and 14.41%, crude protein varied between 9.33 and 14.41%, condensed tannin varied between 1.08 and 4.11%, dry matter digestibility (DMD) varied between 58.01 and 66.41%, dry matter intake (DMI) varied between 2.15 and 3.55% and relative feed value (RFV) varied between 160.93 and 300.55. The study revealed that lesser burnet genotypes generally have higher mineral content compared to many other forage plants commonly used in animal nutrition. Furthermore, the GT biplot analysis, which explained 61.90% of the variation, was effective in genotype selection. The study suggests that many lesser burnet genotypes have the potential to be cultivated in field agriculture and could contribute to animal nutrition in the future due to their superior characteristics.
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.