Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41897895›Full record

ArticleAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2026

Comparative Evaluation of High-Throughput In Vitro Digestion Methods for Predicting In Vivo Digestibility and Fecal Odor Emissions in Pigs.

Ching-Yi Chen, Ruei-Yang Huang, Han-Tsung Wang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Ching-Yi ChenDepartment of Animal Science and Technology, National Taiwan University, Taipei 10672, Taiwan.ORCID 0000-0002-5776-084X
Ruei-Yang HuangDepartment of Animal Science and Technology, National Taiwan University, Taipei 10672, Taiwan.
Han-Tsung WangDepartment of Animal Science and Technology, National Taiwan University, Taipei 10672, Taiwan.ORCID 0000-0002-5142-8619

Funding

Ministry of Agriculture, Republic of China (Taiwan) 112AS-2.1.5-AD-U1 and 113AS-2.1.4-AD-01
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Accurate and physiologically relevant in vitro models are needed to predict nutrient digestibility and hindgut fermentation in pigs, as conventional in vivo trials are resource-intensive and raise animal welfare concerns. This study evaluated and compared the predictive performance of three in vitro digestion approaches-shaking (S), dialysis (D), and a combined shaking plus dialysis (SD) method-for estimating in vivo apparent total tract digestibility (ATTD) and fermentation characteristics across weaning, growing, and finishing pigs. Commercial diets were subjected to simulated gastric and small-intestinal digestion using S, D, or SD, followed by fecal inoculation to model hindgut fermentation for 12 and 48 h. During the gastrointestinal phase, crude protein digestibility was highest with D (>75%), intermediate with SD, and lowest with S (50-60%), indicating that product removal by dialysis mitigated enzyme inhibition from metabolite accumulation. After 48 h of fermentation, all methods showed strong linear correlations with in vivo ATTD (r > 0.93), but only D achieved high absolute agreement (Lin's CCC > 0.95 for dry matter and crude protein). Moreover, D and SD at 48 h closely reflected in vivo fecal profiles of skatole, indole, and microbial enzyme activities, with D at 12 h showing an especially strong correlation for protease (r = 0.98). While D provided the most precise predictions of absolute values, the SD method offered an optimal balance between physiological relevance and operational efficiency, supporting its use as a robust, high-throughput platform for porcine feed evaluation and fecal nitrogenous odorant prediction.

Indexed as

dialysisdigestibility predictionfermentation kineticsin vitro digestion methododorous compounds

Identifiers

PMID41897895
PMCPMC13023255

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.