ArticlePoultry science2026
The effect of housing system and broiler breed on meat quality
Article in Poultry 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study investigated the effects of the silvopastoral (SP) rearing system compared with a conventional (CV) indoor system, along with the influence of broiler breed (fast-growing, FAST vs. slow-growing, SLOW), on carcass traits (yields), meat quality, myopathy incidence, fatty acid profile, oxidative stability (TBARS), and sensory attributes. A 2 × 2 factorial design was conducted, using 250 birds per treatment, with 5 replicate pens (50 birds/pen). For data collection, 10 birds were selected from each pen for processing, giving a total of 5 replicates and 50 samples per treatment. FAST consistently exhibited superior carcass and breast yields, while SLOW had minimal breast muscle myopathies, regardless of the system. Several physicochemical traits were primarily influenced by the breed, with SLOW's breast exhibiting a greater content of connective tissue and shear force. In comparison, FAST exhibited greater moisture content. The housing system influenced lipid composition and oxidative stability, with SP meat exhibiting lower saturated fatty acid content than CV (40.16% vs. 42.04%) and reduced TBARS values (1.50 vs. 1.59 mg MDA/kg). However, the effect of SP on FAST was limited, as cooking loss did not differ between SP and CV systems (30.91% vs. 32.76%). Sensory results showed minimal differences; meat from CV birds was rated slightly juicier, while SLOW's meat was described as chewier and gummier. Overall, trade-offs were identified between yield performance and meat quality; meat from fast-growing birds had greater production efficiency but exhibited a greater incidence of muscular abnormalities. SP production demonstrated the potential to enhance certain meat quality traits without compromising sensory acceptance, albeit at a lower yield expense.
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.