ArticleJournal of advanced veterinary and animal research2025
Effect of floor versus conventional elevated housing on the welfareand meat quality of rabbits.
Article in Journal of advanced veterinary and animal research, 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
Objective: The housing system is a crucial determinant of animal welfare. This study aimed to compare the effects of intensive housing with those of alternative floor housing on the welfare of rabbits and their meat production. Materials and Methods: Eighty New Zealand rabbits (40 females and 40 males) with an initial mean weight of 1.3 kg and aged 35 days were distributed into four treatment groups. Treatment 1 (T1) comprised five floor cages with four male rabbits in each cage; Treatment 2 (T2) comprised five floor cages, each containing four female rabbits; Treatment 3 (T3) consisted of five elevated cages housing four male rabbits each, and Treatment 4 (T4) consisted of five elevated cages housing four female rabbits each. Indicators of carcass quality, including moisture, protein, lipids, ash, pH, color (L*, a*, b*), physiological stress (plasma cortisol), oxidative stress (lipid oxidation TBARS), and number of antioxidants (FRAP) in the plasma and tissue, were measured. Results: A significant difference ( Conclusion: The type of cage used affects rabbits' physiological stress levels and lipid oxidation in muscle tissue, which impacts meat quality. The nutritional value of meat remains unaffected, regardless of the cage type or sex of the rabbit. The floor cage environment enables the rabbits to engage in activities typical of their species, thereby contributing to the animals' welfare by improving driving skills, attitudes, and handler behavior.
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.