You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Studying the effect of formic acid and potassium diformate on performance, immunity and gut health of broiler chickens
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Animal Nutrition, August 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.aninu.2016.08.003 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Naela M. Ragaa, Reda M.S. Korany |
| Abstract |
Our trial was conducted to study the effects of formic acid (FA) and potassium di-formate (KDF) in broiler ration on performance, carcass traits, blood biochemical, intestinal microbial load, histological picture of intestine and immune parameters of broilers. In this study 360 one-day-old broiler chicks were divided to 3 groups with 3 replicates of 40 chicks each. The trial continued for 35 days. The control group was fed only basal diet (G1). Group 2 (G2) were fed basal diet supplemented with FA (5 g/kg diet), and group 3 (G3) received basal diet supplemented with KDF (5 g/kg diet). The results showed that both FA and KDF significantly increased body weight gain (BWG), dressing percentage of broilers and significantly decreased feed conversion ratio (FCR) (P < 0.05). The highest percent of breast and thigh was observed in G3. The improvement in villus height was observed in G2 and G3 compared with the control one, and the highest was in G3. The results evidence that the using of FA or KDF in broiler feeds have significant effects on performance, immune parameters, and gut health without having any significant effects on blood biochemical. However, KDF is more effective than FA as little amount of FA reaches the small intestine due to metabolism and absorption, whereas KDF permits a proportion of FA to pass through the fore-gut intact and enter the small intestinal tract. In addition, FA has a strong odor and corrosiveness to gastrointestinal tract which limits its use. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 75 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 75 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 12 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 15% |
| Researcher | 9 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 8% |
| Lecturer | 5 | 7% |
| Other | 11 | 15% |
| Unknown | 21 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 33 | 44% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 5 | 7% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 7% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 4% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 4 | 5% |
| Unknown | 24 | 32% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 18 April 2017.
All research outputs
#3,621,629
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Animal Nutrition
#34
of 373 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#62,633
of 369,331 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Animal Nutrition
#1
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 373 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 369,331 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them