ArticleTropical animal health and production2026
Cross-sectional and longitudinal methods for describing the growth curve of Brahman females.
Article in Tropical animal health and production, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Growth curve modeling is a fundamental tool in animal production, allowing the analysis of the relationship between body weight and age through nonlinear statistical models. Traditionally, this curve has been obtained using the longitudinal method, which requires repeated measurements of the same individuals from birth to adulthood, making the process time-consuming and costly. As an alternative, the cross-sectional method uses single measurements from animals at different ages, reducing the time required for data collection. The present study aimed to evaluate the fit of different models to body weight data of Brahman females obtained by both longitudinal (n = 34) and cross-sectional (n = 219) methods, covering ages from birth to 65 months, select the most appropriate model, and compare the methods to assess the ability of the cross-sectional method to describe the growth curve of this population. In addition, critical points of the growth function were estimated to support decision-making in genetic improvement and productive management. The models were evaluated based on the coefficient of determination (R²), Akaike Information Criterion (AIC), and residual standard deviation, based on analyses performed in R software. The Gompertz model showed the best fit for the longitudinal data (R² = 0.9953), whereas the Logistic model provided the best fit for the cross-sectional data (R² = 0.9916). The results indicate that the cross-sectional method may represent a practical alternative to the longitudinal method for describing the growth curve of Brahman females, particularly when systematic data collection is not feasible.
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.