4.7 Review

Meta-analysis of the effect of oral selenium supplementation on milk selenium concentration in cattle

期刊

JOURNAL OF DAIRY SCIENCE
卷 92, 期 1, 页码 324-342

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.3168/jds.2008-1545

关键词

cattle; milk; selenium; meta-analysis

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Soils in many regions of the world have a low Se content. Consequently, forages and crops grown on these soils may provide inadequate dietary Se for humans and grazing animals. Selenium supplementation has been used to enhance Se status and milk Se concentration, but results conflict. Milk Se concentration appears to be a useful indicator of animal and herd Se status, and reflects the responsiveness to supplementation. A systematic review and meta-analysis were carried out to summarize all available scientific evidence for the effect of oral Se supplementation on milk Se concentration in cattle. The literature search was based on electronic and nonelectronic databases. Fixed- and random-effects models of meta-analysis were used, and a meta-regression was carried out to evaluate heterogeneity among studies. Random-effects meta-analysis was performed on 42 studies published between 1977 and 2007. Oral Se supplementation resulted in an average increase in milk Se content of 0.16 (95% confidence interval: 0.117, 0.207) mu mol/L, with a significant heterogeneity among studies. Weak publication bias was evident, but it did not change the average effect. The continent where the study was performed, Se source, Se dose, and the interaction between source and dose explained 71% of the between-study variance. On average, American cows supplemented with Se yeast (e.g., 6 mg/h per day) had greater milk Se concentrations (approximately 0.37 mu mol/L) 75 d after the beginning of supplementation when compared with those supplemented with inorganic forms of Se. This information provides a basis for tailoring daily animal requirements and for enhancing the Se intake of consumers of dairy products.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据