ReviewJournal of animal science2026
ASAS-NANP symposium: mathematical modeling in animal nutrition: Model Transfer and Application in Livestock Production Systems.
Review in Journal of animal 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Mathematical models have long supported nutrition management in livestock systems, progressing from early National Research Council empirical tables to complex mechanistic frameworks such as the Ruminant Nutrition System. What is less documented is how models are operationalized in commercial practice, particularly as data streams from precision livestock technologies, remote sensing, and other Internet of Things technologies are increasingly hybridized into existing modeling frameworks. A prevailing assumption is that greater sensing, automation, or algorithmic complexity will naturally translate into better decisions; however, adoption and impact in commercial systems remain uneven. To examine how models are actually used under real-world constraints, we conducted a literature review and semi-structured interviews (n = 11) with livestock producers, technology developers, consultants, and value-chain actors working at the interface of biology, data, models, and farm decision-making. Six cross-cutting themes emerged: 1) model augmentation of systems, 2) model predictive control (MPC), 3) human centered adoption, 4) technology fit, 5) data bottlenecks, and 6) data enlightened value chain. Collectively, these insights re-center nutrition as the integrating discipline for productivity, welfare, and sustainability, and emphasize MPC and open, interoperable data pipelines, as prerequisites for moving beyond pilots toward durable adoption. Interviewees consistently emphasized that meaningful impact depends on aligning biological realism, software engineering, and value-chain incentives so that models support actionable decisions under commercial constraints, rather than pursuing automation for its own sake.
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.