SynthesisTropical animal health and production2025
A systematic review and meta-analysis of effect of mutant traits in chickens.
Synthesis in Tropical animal health and production, 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
Mutant traits in chickens, such as naked neck, frizzle, dwarfism, and featherless, have been associated with improved adaptability, productivity, and resilience under different environmental conditions. The study aimed to evaluate the effects of mutant traits on productivity outcomes in chickens through the systematic review and meta-analysis approach. A total of 164 articles were retrieved from Scholar, PubMed, ScienceDirect, and Web of Science databases and only 28 were used for systematic review while 12 were used for meta-analysis between the year 1993 and 2025, which contained information concerning 16,821 and 4939 chickens with mutant traits and without mutant traits, respectively. The pooled analysis revealed no significant effect of mutant traits on hen day egg production (2.86; 95% CI: −2.32; 8.03), egg number (0.43; 95% CI: −0.52; 1.38), egg weight (1.19; 95% CI: −0.95; 3.33), hatchability (−3.41; 95% CI: −7.78; −0.95), shell percentage (1.42; 95% CI: −0.28; 3.13), feed intake (1.65; 95% CI: −2.88; 6.18), body weight (11.29; 95% CI: −57.48; 80.05), mortality (0.63; 95% CI: −4.30, 5.56), feed conversion ratio (−0.06; 95% CI: −0.18, −0.06), and breast yield percentage (0.65; 95% CI: −0.08, 1.38). However, a significant positive effect was observed on dressing yield percentage (2.40; 95% CI: 1.05; 3.76) and giblet yield (0.42; 95% CI: 0.17, 0.68), while a significant reduction was noted in abdominal fat (−0.54; 95% CI: −1.00, −0.08). Overall, the results indicated high heterogeneity across the findings suggesting variability among the included studies. Mutant traits can enhance poultry traits, however their impact on productivity remains variable.
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.