ArticleCurrent developments in nutrition2025
Article in Current developments in nutrition, 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
Background: Good-quality feed is essential for successful livestock production and for ensuring the distribution of high-quality, safe animal products. Objectives: This study evaluated the impact of using Azolla and black soldier fly (BSF) larvae meals as the main protein ingredients in formulated rabbit feed on the quality of the feed and the meat produced. Methods: Three isocaloric diets were formulated: Az_diet (Azolla meal as the main protein source), BSF_diet (BSF larvae meal as the main protein source), and SM_diet (soybean meal as the main protein source). A palatability test was carried out on 5 feeds: Az_diet, BSF_diet, SM_diet, live BSF larvae, and fresh Azolla leaves. These feeds were offered to 5 rabbits (aged 12 wk) for 10 d in a free-choice test. The growth test was carried out on 36 rabbits aged 5-6 wk. The rabbits were divided into 3 groups of 12 and fed 1 of the 3 diets (Az_diet, BSF_diet, or SM_diet) ad libitum for 42 d. The measured parameters were feed quality and health quality of rabbit meat. Results: The result test showed that the SM_diet was the most palatable for the rabbits, representing 82.03% of the feed consumed during the free-choice feeding test. No mortality or significant differences in feed intake were recorded for the 3 treatments. The BSF_diet treatment resulted in significantly higher weight gain (1012.5 ± 170.13 g). The Az_diet had the highest protein digestibility (80.39 ± 2.08%). The nutritional composition of the hind leg meat of rabbits was similar for the 3 diets. No lead or cadmium was detected in the hind leg meat of rabbits fed the 3 diets. Conclusions: In this study, using Azolla and BSF larvae meal as the main source of dietary protein did not negatively affect feed quality, rabbit growth, or rabbit meat quality.
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.