↓ Skip to main content

Supplementation of different fat sources affects growth performance and carcass composition of finishing pigs

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Animal Science and Biotechnology, August 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
10 Mendeley
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.
Title
Supplementation of different fat sources affects growth performance and carcass composition of finishing pigs
Published in
Journal of Animal Science and Biotechnology, August 2018
DOI 10.1186/s40104-018-0274-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yanhong Liu, Dong Yong Kil, Victor G. Perez-Mendoza, Minho Song, James E. Pettigrew

Abstract

There are various fat sources with different energy values and fatty acid compositions that may affect growth performance and carcass composition of grow-finishing pigs. A higher net energy was recently reported in choice white grease compared with soybean oil. Therefore, two experiments were conducted to determine whether practical responses confirm that difference between choice white grease and soybean oil, and to extend the observations to other fat sources. In Exp. 1, pigs fed fats had lower (P < 0.05) average daily feed intake in phase II and overall period, greater (P < 0.05) gain:feed in phase I, phase II, and overall period than pigs fed the control diet. Pigs fed fats tended (P = 0.057) to have thicker backfat depth at the last rib than those fed control. Pigs fed 6% fats had greater (P < 0.01) gain:feed in phase II and overall period than pigs fed 3% fats. During phase I, pigs fed choice white grease grew faster (P < 0.05) than pigs fed soybean oil. In Exp. 2, pigs fed dietary fats (soybean oil, choice white grease, animal-vegetable blend, palm oil, or tallow) had greater (P < 0.01) gain:feed in each phase and overall period, greater (P < 0.01) average daily gain in phase I, but lower (P < 0.01) average daily feed intake in phase II an overall than pigs fed the control diets. The choice white grease also increased (P < 0.05) average daily gain during phase I compared with soybean oil. Pigs fed palm oil had thicker (P < 0.05) backfat depth at the 10th rib than those fed soybean oil, animal-vegetable blend, or tallow. Inclusion of 6% dietary fat improved feed efficiency of finishing pigs, while different fats produced different practical results that may be consistent with their different energy values. Results from the early stage indicate that dietary fats with relatively more saturated fatty acids may provide greater energy than those with relatively more unsaturated fatty acids for growing pigs.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 10 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 10 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 1 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 10%
Professor 1 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 10%
Student > Master 1 10%
Other 1 10%
Unknown 4 40%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 20%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 10%
Environmental Science 1 10%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 10%
Psychology 1 10%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 4 40%

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 01 September 2018.
All research outputs
#8,105,254
of 13,454,271 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Animal Science and Biotechnology
#125
of 319 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#149,074
of 266,910 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Animal Science and Biotechnology
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,454,271 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 319 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% 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 266,910 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 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