# Factors Influencing the Effects of Triticale on Laying Hens' Performance: A Meta-Analysis
## 3 Results
### Impact of Triticale and Laying Hens' Strains on Performance of Laying Hens
\begin{tabular}{l c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline  & \multicolumn{4}{c}{**Random-Effect Model 2**} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{**Heterogeneity 3**} & \multirow{2}{*}{\(p\)-Value} \\ \cline{2-3} \cline{5-10}
**Variables 1** & \multicolumn{4}{c}{**95\% CI**} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{**12 (\%)**} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{**12 (\%)**} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{**\(\tau^{2}\)**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**\(\tau\)**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**Q**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**df**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{\(p\)**-Value**} \\ \cline{2-3} \cline{5-10}
**F1** & \multicolumn{4}{c}{**Junillo**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{7} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{0.5537} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{\(-\)0.7914} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{1.8989} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{94.3} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{3.1532} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{1.7757} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{45.71} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{4} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{\(<\)0.0001} \\ _Joesong_ & 4 & 0.6019 & \(-\)0.4436 & 1.6474 & 97.1 & 1.1061 & 1.0517 & & & \\ _Tathcak-97_ & 2 & \(-\)1.3847 & \(-\)2.9017 & 0.1324 & 94.7 & 1.1349 & 1.0653 & & & \\ _Bogo_ & 1 & 3.4901 & 2.7443 & 4.2359 & \(-\) & \(-\) & \(-\) & & & \\ _Unknownov_ & 1 & 1.4525 & 0.9573 & 1.9477 & \(-\) & \(-\) & \(-\) & & & \\ _FCR_ & \multicolumn{4}{c}{_[PERSON]_} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{7} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{0.2868} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{\(-\)0.2218} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{0.7954} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{73.8} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{0.3642} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{0.6035} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{86.52} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{3} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{\(<\)0.0001} \\ _Joesong_ & 4 & 0.0322 & \(-\)0.8457 & 0.9102 & 96.2 & 0.7727 & 0.8790 & & & \\ _Tathcak-97_ & 2 & \(-\)2.2018 & \(-\)2.5884 & \(-\)1.8152 & 0.0 & 0 & 0 & & & \\ _Bogo_ & 1 & 0.1146 & \(-\)0.3478 & 0.5770 & \(-\) & \(-\) & \(-\) & & & \\ _EYC_ & \multicolumn{4}{c}{_Junillo_} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{7} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{\(-\)9.3294} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{\(-\)12.4773} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{\(-\)} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{\(-\)} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{\(-\)} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{\(-\)} & & & \\ _Joesong_ & 4 & \(-\)4.8350 & \(-\)7.4031 & \(-\)2.2668 & 97.9 & 6.7380 & 2.5958 & & & & \\ _Bogo_ & 2 & \(-\)8.0388 & \(-\)22.6128 & 6.5352 & 99.7 & 110.2256 & 10.4988 & & & \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}   
* 1 [FOOTNOTE:*]Footnote 1: **EP**: egg productionInitially, the studies were categorized into five groups to investigate the impact of different tritticale strains (Juanilo, Tathcak-97, Bogo, Joesong, and unknown strains) on laying hens' production parameters (Table 2). Sub-group analyses (meta-ANOVA) revealed that the strain factor influenced (\(p<0.0001\)) the effects of tritticale on EP. Apart from the unknown strain (SMD = \(-1.2838\)), every tritticale strain exhibited a positive effect size or increasing effect on EP (Juanilo: SMD = 0.0802; Joesong: SMD = 0.0322; Tathcak-97: SMD = 1.1490; Bogo: SMD = 0.7258) with significant differences (\(p<0.0001\)) between the group of tritticale's strains. Additionally, the meta-ANOVA indicated that EW was increased (\(p<0.0001\)) by Juanilo (SMD = 4.0086), Joesong (SMD = 0.7262), and unknown strains (SMD = 0.7336) whereas it was significantly decreased by Tathcak-97 (SMD = \(-1.4569\)) and Bogo (SMD = \(-1.6405\)) strains. Regarding FI, it was increased (\(p<0.0001\)) by Juanilo (SMD = 0.0554), Joesong, Bogo, and unknown tritticale's strain but decreased by the Tathcak-97 strain (SMD = \(-0.1010\)). For FCR, the Tathcak-97 tritticale strain induced negative effect size (SMD = \(-2.2018\)), whereas the other tritticale strains induced positive effect sizes (Juanilo: SMD = 0.2868; Bogo: SMD = 0.1146; Joesong: SMD = 0.0322) with significant differences (\(p<0.0001\)) between the tritticale strains. EYC was reduced by every tritticale strain (Juanilo: SMD = \(-9.3294\); Bogo: SMD = \(-8.0388\); Joesong: SMD = \(-4.8350\)) despite no differences between the strain's groups (\(p=0.0936\)). Subsequently, a second meta-ANOVA (sub-group analysis) was performed based on laying hens' strains to check if that factor could impact layers' performance (Table 3).