ArticleVeterinary world2025
Effects of dietary faba bean (
Article in Veterinary world, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aim: The search for sustainable and cost-effective protein alternatives to soybean meal in livestock diets has led to the exploration of legumes such as faba beans [FBs] ( Materials and Methods: Twenty-four male Awassi lambs (initial body weight: 20.54 ± 0.798 kg) were randomly assigned to two groups (n = 12 per group) and fed isonitrogenous diets either with no FB (control diet [CON]) or 20% FB on a dry matter basis (FB20) for 70 days. The trial consisted of a 7-day acclimation period, followed by 63 days of data collection. Carcass evaluation, meat quality analysis (pH, water-holding capacity [WHC], color, and shear force), and blood biochemistry profiling were performed. Results: FB20 supplementation significantly increased loin weight and lean content (p < 0.05), while reducing subcutaneous and total fat percentages (p < 0.05). WHC improved (p = 0.024), shear force decreased (p = 0.024), and meat redness (a*) significantly increased (p < 0.0001) in FB20 lambs. No differences were observed in other meat quality parameters such as pH, cooking loss, whiteness (L*), and yellowness (b*) values. The crude protein content in meat was higher in the FB20 group (p = 0.043), indicating an improved nutritional value. Blood biochemical markers, including urea nitrogen, glucose, cholesterol, creatinine, liver enzymes, and lipoproteins, did not differ between groups (p > 0.05), indicating no adverse health effects. Conclusion: The inclusion of 20% FB in the diet of Awassi lambs improved carcass composition and meat quality without negatively affecting animal health. The observed improvements in meat tenderness, protein content, and color, along with unchanged blood profiles, support the use of FBs as a viable and sustainable protein source in lamb production. Future studies should investigate the long-term effects, consumer acceptance, and optimal inclusion rates across various breeds and production systems.
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.