ArticleJournal of animal science and biotechnology2026
Range-based finishing enhances omega-3 fatty acids and forage-derived metabolites in bison meat across a seven-treatment comparison.
Article in Journal of animal science and biotechnology, 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundFinishing practices influence the biochemical composition of bison (Bison bison) meat, with potential implications for animal health and human nutrition. This study evaluated seven representative finishing systems spanning a range of extensive and intensive production systems, with additional contrasts in forage diversity, corn supplementation, and stocking density to determine their effects on the fatty acid and phytonutrient profiles of bison striploins (M. longissimus lumborum). Treatments included range-finished bison grazing either diverse native pastures (~200 plant species) or lower-diversity pastures (~90 plant species), with or without corn supplementation, as well as pen-finished bison managed under varying feed formulations and stocking densities, including a conventional total mixed ration (TMR) group. Fatty acids were analyzed by gas chromatography-flame ionization detection (GC-FID), and targeted metabolomic profiling of phytonutrient-derived metabolites was performed using liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS).
resultsRange-finished bison exhibited higher concentrations of alpha-linolenic acid (ALA; C18:3n-3; P < 0.0001), docosapentaenoic acid (DPA; C22:5n-3; P < 0.0001), and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA; C22:6n-3; P < 0.0001), and lower n-6:n-3 ratios (2.8-3.6) than pen-finished bison (5.0-7.3; P < 0.0001). Metabolomic profiling revealed enrichment of hippuric acid, catechol, and shikimic acid (candidate biomarkers associated with forage intake and polyphenolic metabolism) in range-finished systems, whereas 3-(4-hydroxyphenyl)lactic acid, a potential grain-associated metabolite, was higher in pen-finished bison than in the unsupplemented range-finished systems (all P < 0.05).
conclusionsRange-finished systems enhanced omega-3 fatty acid and phytonutrient-related metabolite profiles, whereas the conventional TMR feedlot treatment yielded the lowest levels and the free-choice corn-and-hay pen system yielded an intermediate profile. Overall, the clearest nutritional contrast was between range-finished and pen-finished systems, whereas differences attributable to forage diversity or stocking density were comparatively modest. These findings indicate that finishing system strongly influences the biochemical composition of bison meat, although comparisons involving the conventional TMR feedlot treatment should be interpreted cautiously because that group originated from a separate breeding herd.
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.