ArticleJournal of animal science2026
High-throughput in vitro prediction of available energy in feed ingredients for pigs using a novel computer-controlled digestion system.
Article in Journal of animal science, 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to establish predictive equations for digestible energy (DE) and metabolizable energy (ME) of feed ingredients using a novel computer-controlled simulated digestion system (CCSDS) and validate the additivity of predicted energy values in complete diets for growing pigs. An in vivo experiment was conducted to determine the DE and ME of 30 experimental diets. A total of 60 barrows (initial BW of 37.3 ± 4.7 kg) were used, divided into two replicate blocks of 30 pigs each. Within each block, a 30 × 3 Youden square design was implemented across three experimental periods. Two pigs were allocated per diet during each period, resulting in six replicates per diet. Experimental diets included 20 feed ingredients, and 10 validation diets were formulated with the above feed ingredients to assess energy additivity and accuracy. The in vitro digestible energy (IVDE) was determined using CCSDS with five replicates for each diet. Strong correlations were observed between IVDE and in vivo DE (DE = 1.001 × IVDE + 180, R2 = 0.85, RSD = 310 kcal/kg of DM, P < 0.01) and ME (ME = 1.015 × IVDE-29, R2 = 0.89, RSD = 254 kcal/kg of DM, P < 0.01), with predicted values closely aligning with determined values across all feed ingredients. The mean IVDE: DE and IVDE: ME were approximately 0.95 and 0.99, respectively, highlighting the high predictive accuracy of CCSDS. Validation diets demonstrated consistent energy additivity. Single sample t-tests revealed no difference was observed between predicted and determined DE values in eight out of ten diets, and between predicted and determined ME values in 9 out of 10 diets. In conclusion, these findings underscore the utility of CCSDS as a cost-effective and reliable alternative to in vivo methods, offering significant potential for precise energy assessment in swine feed formulation.
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.