Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42743745›Full record

ArticlePoultry science2026

Comparative compositional analysis of commercially produced mule duck and Landes goose foie gras.

Yutong Xiao, Qiming Mu, Dapeng Liu, Hehe Tang, Hongfei Liu, He Zhang, Sirui Liu, Sidi Zhang, Jiaxin Zhang, Yongfu Zhang and 8 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

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

18 authors.

Yutong XiaoState Key Laboratory of Animal Biotech Breeding, Institute of Animal Science, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100193, China.
Qiming MuState Key Laboratory of Animal Biotech Breeding, Institute of Animal Science, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100193, China.
Dapeng LiuState Key Laboratory of Animal Biotech Breeding, Institute of Animal Science, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100193, China.
Hehe TangState Key Laboratory of Animal Biotech Breeding, Institute of Animal Science, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100193, China.
Hongfei LiuState Key Laboratory of Animal Biotech Breeding, Institute of Animal Science, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100193, China.
He ZhangState Key Laboratory of Animal Biotech Breeding, Institute of Animal Science, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100193, China.
Sirui LiuState Key Laboratory of Animal Biotech Breeding, Institute of Animal Science, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100193, China.
Sidi ZhangState Key Laboratory of Animal Biotech Breeding, Institute of Animal Science, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100193, China.
Jiaxin ZhangState Key Laboratory of Animal Biotech Breeding, Institute of Animal Science, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100193, China.
Yongfu ZhangState Key Laboratory of Animal Biotech Breeding, Institute of Animal Science, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100193, China.
Lipeng YuanState Key Laboratory of Animal Biotech Breeding, Institute of Animal Science, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100193, China.
Zhichao HuState Key Laboratory of Animal Biotech Breeding, Institute of Animal Science, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100193, China.
Zhanbao GuoState Key Laboratory of Animal Biotech Breeding, Institute of Animal Science, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100193, China; Chinese Meat Duck Germplasm Innovation Center (Xian County), Xian County, Hebei Province, 062250, China.
Yi TangState Key Laboratory of Animal Biotech Breeding, Institute of Animal Science, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100193, China; Chinese Meat Duck Germplasm Innovation Center (Xian County), Xian County, Hebei Province, 062250, China.
Shuisheng HouState Key Laboratory of Animal Biotech Breeding, Institute of Animal Science, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100193, China; Chinese Meat Duck Germplasm Innovation Center (Xian County), Xian County, Hebei Province, 062250, China.
Jun ZhangJilin Zhengfang Animal Husbandry Co., Ltd., Meihekou City, China.
Wei MinJilin Zhengfang Animal Husbandry Co., Ltd., Meihekou City, China.
Zhengkui ZhouState Key Laboratory of Animal Biotech Breeding, Institute of Animal Science, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100193, China; Chinese Meat Duck Germplasm Innovation Center (Xian County), Xian County, Hebei Province, 062250, China. Electronic address: zhouzhengkui@caas.cn.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study compared the compositional characteristics of commercially produced foie gras from mule ducks and Landes geese by integrating solid-phase microextraction gas chromatography-mass spectrometry, untargeted metabolomics, and untargeted lipidomics. Landes goose foie gras showed a significantly greater liver weight and higher moisture content than mule duck foie gras, indicating clear product-level differences in gross traits. Volatile profiling identified 153 compounds, of which 48 differed significantly between the two groups. Mule duck foie gras displayed a volatile profile enriched in floral-, fruity-, and spice-associated compounds, whereas Landes goose foie gras was characterized by a higher abundance of compounds associated with grassy, earthy, and lipid oxidation-related notes. Untargeted metabolomics identified 834 polar metabolites, including 132 differential metabolites, suggesting additional but relatively moderate compositional divergence at the small-molecule level. Untargeted lipidomics detected 536 lipids, among which 85 differed significantly. Mule duck foie gras was characterized by a higher relative abundance of several unsaturated triglycerides and selected phospholipid species, whereas Landes goose foie gras showed enrichment of several long-chain saturated triglycerides and bile-related components. Collectively, these results demonstrate that mule duck and Landes goose foie gras can be clearly differentiated at the levels of product traits, volatile composition, polar metabolites, and lipid profiles. The observed differences are best interpreted as integrated compositional differences between two commercially produced foie gras types obtained under species-specific production regimens, and they provide a useful basis for quality evaluation, product discrimination, and further targeted studies of flavor and lipid deposition patterns.

Indexed as

Foie grasLandes gooseMetabolomicsMule duckSPME-GC-MS

Identifiers

PMID42743745
PMCPMC13594933

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.