Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40400196›Full record

ArticleAnimal bioscience2025

Evaluation of feeding effects of pelletized total mixed ration in Hu sheep: growth performance, bacterial community and rumen fermentation.

Chuankai Zhang, Xiaohui Kong, Peijun Hou, Tengyun Gao, Huaijun Zheng, Wenqing Li, Tong Fu, Liyang Zhang

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Animal bioscience, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

8 authors.

Chuankai ZhangCollege of Animal Science and Technology, Henan International Joint Laboratory of Nutrition Regulation and Ecological Raising of Domestic Animals, Henan Agricultural University, Zhengzhou, China.
Xiaohui KongCollege of Animal Science and Technology, Henan International Joint Laboratory of Nutrition Regulation and Ecological Raising of Domestic Animals, Henan Agricultural University, Zhengzhou, China.
Peijun HouCollege of Animal Science and Technology, Henan International Joint Laboratory of Nutrition Regulation and Ecological Raising of Domestic Animals, Henan Agricultural University, Zhengzhou, China.
Tengyun GaoCollege of Animal Science and Technology, Henan International Joint Laboratory of Nutrition Regulation and Ecological Raising of Domestic Animals, Henan Agricultural University, Zhengzhou, China.
Huaijun ZhengGongzhuling Hefeng Ruminant Feed Co., Ltd, Gongzhuling, China.
Wenqing LiCollege of Life Science, Henan Agricultural University, Zhengzhou, China.
Tong FuCollege of Animal Science and Technology, Henan International Joint Laboratory of Nutrition Regulation and Ecological Raising of Domestic Animals, Henan Agricultural University, Zhengzhou, China.
Liyang ZhangCollege of Animal Science and Technology, Henan International Joint Laboratory of Nutrition Regulation and Ecological Raising of Domestic Animals, Henan Agricultural University, Zhengzhou, China.

Funding

National Key Research and Development Program of China 2024YFD1300204
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe study aimed to compare the growth performance, rumen fermentation, and rumen bacterial community of fattening Hu sheep fed either total mixed ration (TMR) or pelleted total mixed ration (PTMR) and to assess the feeding efficiency.

methodsIn a 58-day feeding experiment, forty-eight Hu sheep were randomly assigned to two groups (TMR and PTMR), with six pens per group and four sheep per pen. Body weight and feed intake were measured throughout the experiment to assess growth performance. On the final day of the experiment, rumen fluid was collected from sheep using a rumen fluid collector two hours post-feeding.

resultsThe sheep in the PTMR group exhibited significantly higher body weight (p<0.05) and average daily gain (p<0.01) compared to those in the TMR group, although the effect of PTMR on dry matter intake was not statistically significant (p>0.05). No statistically significant differences were observed in rumen fermentation parameters between the TMR and PTMR groups. However, analysis of rumen bacteria revealed that the Sob, Ace, Bootstrap, Shannon, and Chao indices were significantly lower in the PTMR group compared to the TMR group (p<0.05). Bacteroidetes and Firmicutes were the predominant bacteria in all groups, with the abundance of Succinivibrionaceae_UCG-001 significantly lower in the PTMR group. The relative abundance of Rikenellaceae_RC9_gut_group, NK4A214_group, and Streptococcus was significantly higher in the TMR group than in the PTMR group (p<0.05). Bacterial function prediction showed downregulation of the energy production and conversion pathway in the PTMR group (p<0.05). Correlation analysis indicated that norank_f_Bacteroidales_RF16 positively correlated with butyric acid (p<0.05), while Anaerovibrio negatively correlated with acetic acid, propionic acid, butyric acid, and total volatile fatty acids (p<0.05).

conclusionIn summary, the results demonstrate that PTMR significantly enhances average daily gain in Hu sheep while maintaining rumen fermentation parameters, although accompanied by modifications in rumen bacterial community structure.

Indexed as

Growth PerformancePelleted Total Mixed RationRumen BacteriaSheep

Identifiers

PMID40400196
PMCPMC12415363

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.