ArticleJournal of animal science2025
Protein quality of chicken-based protein sources evaluated by precision-fed cecectomized rooster assay.
Article in Journal of animal science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Evaluating the protein quality of ingredients is essential for formulating nutritionally adequate canine and feline diets. This study aimed to determine and compare the standardized amino acid (AA) digestibility using the precision-fed cecectomized rooster assay. Four ingredients were tested: spray-dried chicken protein hydrolysate (CPH), spray-dried chicken meat (CC), spray-dried chicken broth (CB), and chicken meal (CM). Sixteen cecectomized roosters (4 roosters per substrate) were randomly assigned to the 4 test substrates. After 26 h of feed withdrawal, roosters were tube-fed 12 g of test substrates and 12 g of corn, and the AA digestibility of the test ingredient was calculated by difference. Following crop intubation, excreta were collected for 48 h. Endogenous corrections for AA were made using 5 additional fasted cecectomized roosters to calculate standardized AA digestibility values. All data were analyzed using the Mixed Models procedure of SAS. Generally, CC had the highest (P < 0.05) standardized digestibility for AA, followed by CPH. Methionine, phenylalanine, and valine had higher (P < 0.05) digestibility in CC and CPH than in CB and CM. Digestibility of isoleucine and leucine were higher (P < 0.05) in roosters fed CC, followed by CPH, CM, and CB. Higher lysine digestibility (P < 0.05) was observed in rooster-fed CC and CPH, followed by CM and CB. Histidine and threonine had the lowest digestibility (P < 0.05) in CB compared to all other ingredients. In contrast, the digestibility of tryptophan was highest (P < 0.05) in CC, followed by CPH and CB, while CM had similar (P > 0.05) digestibility to CC and CPH. Amino acid digestibility for most indispensable AA was above 80% for all ingredients, except for histidine, lysine, and threonine, which were exceptions only for CB (68%, 73%, and 74%, respectively). For selected dispensable AA, the digestibility was above 60% for all ingredients, except for aspartic acid in CB and CM, and serine in CB, which were exceptions (43%, 68%, and 66%, respectively). In general, the lowest digestible indispensable amino acid score values (DIAAS) were observed in roosters fed CB, followed by CPH, CM, and the highest in CC. Overall, CC and CPH have comparable indispensable AA digestibility. Based on DIAAS-like values, tryptophan and phenylalanine + tyrosine were identified as the first limiting AA for adult dogs and growing puppies, while phenylalanine + tyrosine was the first limiting AA for adult cats and growing kittens.
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.