ArticlePoultry science2026
Comparative evaluation of phytate and phytase addition on growth performance and nutrient utilization efficiency in broilers and ducks.
Article in Poultry science, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to comparative evaluation of dietary phytate level and phytase addition on growth performance and nutrient utilization efficiency in 21 day-aged broilers and ducks. A total of 540 one-day-old male Arbor-Acres broilers and 540 Cherry Valley ducks were randomly assigned to 9 dietary treatments, with 6 replicates of 10 birds each (60 birds per treatment in total). The dietary treatments included a positive control (PC) containing 0.40% non-phytate phosphorus (nPP) without phytase, and 8 low nPP diets (0.24% nPP) arranged in a 2 × 4 factorial design. The factorial treatment consisted of two phytate-P levels (2.4 and 3.4 g/kg) and four phytase supplementation levels (0, 500, 1000, and 1500 FTU/kg). The results showed that compared with the PC, feeding low-nPP diets significantly impaired the growth performance of both broilers and ducks (P < 0.05). In the absence of phytase, high phytate-P exerted a negative effect on the growth performance in broilers but significantly improved that of ducks (P < 0.05). For broilers, low phytate-P significantly enhenced calcium (Ca) and phosphorus (P) retention, as well as apparent metabolizable energy (AME). In contrast, high phytate-P reduced Ca retention without affecting P retention or AME. For ducks, both phytate-P levels of reduced Ca and P retention, but high phytate-P augured a significant increase in AME (P < 0.05). Under low-nPP diets, plasma P levels decreased in both species; in broilers, plasma P was further reduced by high phytate-P, whereas ducks showed the opposite pattern (P < 0.05). Plasma Ca remained unchanged in broilers but increased with elevated phytate-P in ducks (P < 0.05). Phytase supplementation significantly improved growth performance, nutrient retention, and plasma P levels in both species (P < 0.05). In addition, phytase inclusion increased AME in ducks alon, with no significant effects on AME in broilers or on plasma Ca levels in either species. Collectively, these findings demonstrate species-specific responses of broilers and ducks to dietary phytate and phytase, indicating that phosphorus utilization data derived from broilers cannot be directly extrapolated to ducks. Therefore, species-specific adjustments should be made in feed formulations to optimize nutrient utilization and growth performance in each species.
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.