↓ Skip to main content

Evaluation of the feeding value of Dichrostachys cinerea pods for fattening pigs in Cuba

Overview of attention for article published in Tropical Animal Health and Production, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (69th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
17 Mendeley
Title
Evaluation of the feeding value of Dichrostachys cinerea pods for fattening pigs in Cuba
Published in
Tropical Animal Health and Production, June 2017
DOI 10.1007/s11250-017-1321-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

N. Martín-Casas, M. Reinoso-Pérez, J.R. García-Díaz, H.H. Hansen, M.O. Nielsen

Abstract

Dichrostachys cinerea (L.) Wight & Arn. is a tropical leguminous shrub widely regarded as an invasive species in Cuba, after having invaded a significant proportion of its arable land during the past decades. Concurrently, smallholder pig producers are highly constrained by the scarcity of protein feeds. This study aimed to assess the feeding value of D. cinerea pod meal (DCPM) as an alternative protein supplement for pigs in Cuban smallholder production systems. An on-farm feeding trial was carried out with three groups (N = 10) of growing-fattening pigs over 60 days, where DCPM replaced 0, 15, and 30% in DM of a dietary commercial concentrate. Then, in an in vivo digestibility trial with eight growing pigs, apparent digestibilities of DCPM were determined for dry matter (DM), organic matter (OM) and crude protein (CP). Finally, in vitro digestibilities for OM (fecal and ileal) and CP (ileal) were determined. In the feeding trial, pig body weight gains were not affected by increased dietary substitution levels of concentrate for DCPM. Blood parameters, with a few exceptions, did not show significant differences among groups. Values for in vivo OM and CP digestibilities were 40.81 and 50.26%, and substantially higher than in vitro values. In conclusion, our results showed that at least 30% of DM in commercial concentrate could be substituted by DCPM without affecting pig growth performances under Cuban smallholder conditions. The low digestibility of DCPM is, however, not acceptable for intensive pig production systems. In vitro enzyme digestibility methods developed for commercial pig feeds are not suitable for DCPM without further calibration.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 17 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 17 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 2 12%
Student > Master 2 12%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 12%
Researcher 2 12%
Professor 1 6%
Other 2 12%
Unknown 6 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 35%
Environmental Science 3 18%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 6%
Unknown 7 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 24 February 2018.
All research outputs
#15,551,440
of 23,911,072 outputs
Outputs from Tropical Animal Health and Production
#504
of 1,384 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#190,562
of 320,476 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Tropical Animal Health and Production
#11
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,911,072 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,384 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% 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 320,476 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 36 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.