ReviewJournal of animal science2025
ASAS-NANP symposium: mathematical modeling in animal nutrition: overview of poultry nutrition modeling.
Review in Journal of animal science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- ASAS-NANP symposium: mathematical modeling in animal nutrition: training the future generation in data and predictive analytics for sustainable development. A summary of the 2024 symposium.Journal of animal science · 2026Article
- ASAS-NANP SYMPOSIUM: Mathematical Modeling in Animal Nutrition: Training the Future Generation in Data and Predictive Analytics for Sustainable Development. A Summary of the 2023 Symposium.Journal of animal science · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Mathematical modeling has been used in poultry nutrition for the past 5 decades. Current amino acid recommendations for poultry have been based on mathematical models. This review aims to underscore the potential of modeling methodologies to minimize issues observed with the common use of empirical research, which researchers now realize. The review also discusses critical modeling issues and challenges to expanding modeling research. A comprehensive, although not exhaustive, list of existing models is presented to provide an overview of the efforts to develop these tools. Mechanistic models developed by EFG software and AVINESP are described in general terms since they have been well-documented over the past 3 decades. The framework and supporting data of these models are very similar. However, they differ in the research methodologies, including their parameterization and description of biological processes. The general methodology for model development and the fundamental equations are explained, and the current gaps in knowledge are discussed. The same concepts and description of growth, egg production, tissue and egg composition, and estimation of feed intake can be used to estimate needs for other nutrients and other animal species. The initial developments modeling poultry mineral nutrition are mentioned. Issues related to the accuracy and precision of these models might be resolved using big data, electronic sensors, portable devices to determine body composition, system-wide multi-omics, stable isotope technology, and machine learning techniques. Several publications have already demonstrated the practicality of integrating these methodologies. This review aims to demonstrate the relevance, applications, and solid basis of current mechanistic models that can be applied to advance sustainable poultry nutrition research. Modeling in poultry nutrition can help overcome many limitations observed using empirical methods and provide necessary decision-making tools. Models can be integrated with optimizers and feed formulation software.
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.