ArticleAnimal bioscience2026
Nutritional and performance effects of shrimp meal and yam bean as sustainable ingredients in laying hen diets.
Article in Animal bioscience, 2026. 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveRising poultry feed costs and shortages in Southeast Asia, particularly in Thailand, underscore the need for sustainable alternatives. This study evaluated shrimp meal (SM), a protein-rich by-product, and yam bean (YB), an underutilized energy-rich root crop, as promising alternative feed ingredients for laying hens.
methodsAn in vitro analysis was conducted to determine the chemical composition and digestibility of diets containing SM and varying levels of YB. An 8-week in vivo trial was conducted using 90 ISA-Brown hens (25-week-old), divided into nine dietary groups: one control and eight treatment groups with 10% or 15% SM combined with 0%, 3%, 6%, and 9% YB. Laying performance, egg quality and composition, and nitrogen (N) retention were assessed.
resultsSM was rich in protein while YB contained high N-free extracts and gross energy, supporting their use as alternative protein and energy sources, respectively. The inclusion of SM and YB had no negative effect on in vitro dry matter or protein digestibility. In vivo, combined inclusion of up to 15% SM and 9% YB did not adversely affect laying performance, egg quality, nutrient composition, or N retention compared to the control. A main effect analysis revealed that SM enhanced yolk color, eggshell weight, and eggshell thickness (p<0.05), while reducing egg fat content (p<0.05). Although higher levels of SM were independently associated with reduced hen-day egg production and egg mass, these effects were mitigated when SM was combined with YB, resulting in no differences from the control group at the highest inclusion levels (15% SM and 9% YB).
conclusionThe SM and YB are viable, eco-friendly alternatives to conventional poultry feed ingredients. Their combined inclusion, up to 15% SM and 9% YB, is recommended to maintain laying performance and egg quality while promoting sustainable feeding practices through the utilization of processing by-product and underutilized local crops.
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.