Evidence Hub

Effects of betaine supplementation on dry matter intake, milk characteristics, plasma non-esterified fatty acids, and β-hydroxybutyric acid in dairy cattle: a meta-analysis

M. I. Malik, Muhammad Bilal, M. Z. Anwar, Talal Hassan, M.A. Rashid, Divine T. Tarla, F. Dunshea, Long Cheng

Journal of Animal Science, 2024

9 citations

Abstract

Abstract Betaine supplementation in dairy cattle has gained attention due to its potential benefits to production and health as a methyl donor, which can play a crucial role in the metabolism of dairy cows. The objective of the current meta-analysis was to quantify the effects of betaine supplementation on milk production, composition, β-hydroxybutyric acid (BHBA), and non-esterified fatty acids (NEFA). A systematic literature search was carried out, all relevant studies were retrieved, and the meta-analysis was carried out. The mean difference (MD) for dry matter intake (DMI) using the random-effects model was 0.499 kg/d (P < 0.0001). The subgroup analysis indicated that supplementing betaine in heat-stressed cows increased DMI by 0.584 kg/d (P < 0.001), while in cows not exposed to heat stress, DMI was increased by 0.381 kg/d (P = 0.007). The energy-corrected milk (ECM) increased by 1.36 kg/d (P < 0.0001). The milk fat yield was significantly increased in betaine-supplemented cows (MD = 0.040 kg/d, 95% CI = 0.015 to 0.065). The milk protein yield (kg/d) (MD = 0.014, P = 0.138) was increased (MD = 0.035, P = 0.0005) by betaine supplementation. The lactose yield (kg/d) was also significantly higher (MD = 0.055, P = 0.020) in betaine-supplemented cows. The standardized mean difference (SMD) for NEFA (SMD = − 0.447, 95% CI = − 1.029 to 0.135, P = 0.114) and BHBA (SMD = − 0.130, 95% CI = − 0.491 to 0.234). In conclusion, the findings from this meta-analysis suggest that betaine…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in animal, not in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free