Abstract

This editorial is an annex, essentially an amplification of earlier Animal Feed Science and Technology (AFST) editorials which focused on analytical and statistical issues of papers submitted for publication in AFST. This amplification is needed because, since publication of those editorials, there has been a sharp increase in papers submitted to AFST (particularly in vitro gas, ruminal in sacco, continuous culture fermenter and mini-silo studies), in which there have been substantive disagreements among authors, reviewers and editors as to what, exactly, constitutes acceptable statistical replicates as opposed to pseudo replicates. In this editorial, the Co-Editors in Chief of AFST provide clarification of their view relative to use of analytical observations in statistical analyses in papers submitted for consideration for publication in AFST. If the objective is to compare feeds and from the results, make inferences to populations, only multiple samples of each feed represent an acceptable feed base. This suggests that means comparisons based on repeated assays of the same sample, whether by chemical, physical or microbiological methods, will almost certainly be rejected by the CEIC. (C) 2011 Elsevier By. All rights reserved.

Keywords

Replicates; Statistical analyses

Published in

Animal Feed Science and Technology
2012, Volume: 171, number: 1, pages: 1-5
Publisher: Elsevier Science BV

SLU Authors

• Udén, Peter

  • Department of Applied Animal Science and Welfare, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences
    

UKÄ Subject classification

Agricultural Science


Publication identifier

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2011.10.008

Permanent link to this page (URI)

https://res.slu.se/id/publ/40439