ArticleVeterinary sciences2025
Meta-Analysis of Dietary Interventions for Enteric Methane Mitigation in Ruminants Through Methodological Advancements and Implementation Pathways.
Article in Veterinary sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Nutrigenomics in precision livestock and poultry farming: Enhancing productivity, welfare, and sustainability through gene-tailored diets.Veterinary and animal science · 2026Review
- Clays as Additives in Ruminant Feed: A Quantitative Meta-Analysis of Their Effects on Enteric Methane, Digestion, Health and Productivity.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026Review
- From slaughterhouse waste to functional feed: pilot-scale bovine blood hydrolysate improves antioxidant activities and meat quality in slow-growing chickens.Food science of animal resources · 2026Article
- Biotechnology Approaches to Dairy Alternatives Through Precision Fermentation and Cellular Agriculture.Food science of animal resources · 2025Review
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This meta-analysis systematically evaluates the efficacy of dietary interventions for mitigating enteric methane production in ruminants through the application of advanced statistical methodologies. A comprehensive dataset comprising 119 peer-reviewed publications (2000-2024) was analyzed using robust variance estimation, multilevel modeling, and network meta-analysis to quantify intervention efficacy and identify moderating factors while properly accounting for within-study dependencies. The results demonstrate a clear efficacy hierarchy of macroalgae (51.0% reduction [95% CI: 37.0-63.0%]), 3-nitrooxypropanol (3-NOP; 30.6% [95% CI: 22.0-45.0%]), nitrate (16.0% [95% CI: 6.0-26.0%]), oils (14.7% [95% CI: 5.0-24.0%]), and phytochemicals (13.5% [95% CI: 4.0-22.0%]). The meta-regression analyses identified significant dose-response relationships for macroalgae (coefficient = -0.212,
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.