↓ Skip to main content

Dietary inclusion effects of phytochemicals as growth promoters in animal production

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Animal Science and Technology, April 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
151 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
224 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
Dietary inclusion effects of phytochemicals as growth promoters in animal production
Published in
Journal of Animal Science and Technology, April 2017
DOI 10.1186/s40781-017-0133-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nidia Vanessa Valenzuela-Grijalva, Araceli Pinelli-Saavedra, Adriana Muhlia-Almazan, David Domínguez-Díaz, Humberto González-Ríos

Abstract

Growth promoters have been widely used as a strategy to improve productivity, and great benefits have been observed throughout the meat production chain. However, the prohibition of growth promoters in several countries, as well as consumer rejection, has led industry and the academy to search for alternatives. For decades, the inclusion of phytochemicals in animal feed has been proposed as a replacement for traditional growth promoters. However, there are many concerns about the application of phytochemicals and their impact on the various links in the meat production chain (productive performance, carcass and meat quality). Therefore, the effects of these feed additives are reviewed in this article, along with their potential safety and consumer benefits, to understand the current state of their use. In summary, the replacement of traditional growth promoters in experiments with broilers yielded benefits in all aspects of the meat production chain, such as improvements in productive performance and carcass and meat quality. Although the effects in pigs have been similar to those observed in broilers, fewer studies have been carried out in pigs, and there is a need to define the types of phytochemicals to be used and the appropriate stages for adding such compounds. In regard to ruminant diets, few studies have been conducted, and their results have been inconclusive. Therefore, it is necessary to propose more in vivo studies to determine other strategies for phytochemical inclusion in the production phases and to select the appropriate types of compounds. It is also necessary to define the variables that will best elucidate the mechanism(s) of action that will enable the future replacement of synthetic growth promoters with phytochemical feed additives.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 224 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 224 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 29 13%
Researcher 22 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 9%
Student > Bachelor 17 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 16 7%
Other 41 18%
Unknown 79 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 75 33%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 21 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 3%
Unspecified 5 2%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 2%
Other 23 10%
Unknown 90 40%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 August 2017.
All research outputs
#22,764,772
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Animal Science and Technology
#123
of 190 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#283,702
of 323,974 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Animal Science and Technology
#3
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 190 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.6. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 323,974 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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.