Evidence map›Paper›PMID 12571010›Full record

ArticleApplied and environmental microbiology2003

Evaluation of broiler litter with reference to the microbial composition as assessed by using 16S rRNA and functional gene markers.

Jingrang Lu, Susan Sanchez, Charles Hofacre, John J Maurer, Barry G Harmon, Margie D Lee

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Applied and environmental microbiology, 2003. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 53 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
53citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

53 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. How Safe is Chicken Litter for Land Application as an Organic Fertilizer? A Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019
    Pooled it
  2. Can probiotics improve the environmental microbiome and resistome of commercial poultry production?International journal of environmental research and public health · 2013
    Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Influence of Different Litter Regimens on Ceca Microbiota Profiles inAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Longitudinal Changes inApplied and environmental microbiology · 2022
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Characterization ofFrontiers in microbiology · 2022
    Article
  20. High-Frequency Detection ofFrontiers in microbiology · 2022
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Jingrang LuMedical Microbiology and Parasitology, College of Veterinary Medicine, The University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia 30602, USA.
Susan Sanchez
Charles Hofacre
John J Maurer
Barry G Harmon
Margie D Lee

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Very little is known about the microbial composition of animal bedding wastes, including poultry litter, and what is known has been deduced from standard culture methods, by which some fastidious organisms that exist in the environment may not be detected. We evaluated the bacterial composition of poultry litter by using a combination of culture and molecular detection. Total aerobic bacteria in poultry litter were detected by culture at 10(9) CFU/g of material. Enteric bacteria such as Enterococcus spp. and coliforms composed 0.1 and 0.01%, respectively, of the total aerobic cultivatable bacteria in poultry litter; no Salmonella strains were detected by culture. In order to characterize the most abundant bacterial groups, we sequenced 16S ribosomal DNA (rDNA) genes amplified by PCR with microbial community DNA isolated from poultry litter as the template. From the 16S rDNA library, 31 genera were identified. Twelve families or groups were identified with lactobacilli and Salinococcus spp. forming the most abundant groups. In fact, 82% of the total sequences were identified as gram-positive bacteria with 62% of total belonging to low G+C gram-positive groups. In addition to detection of 16S rDNA sequences associated with the expected fecal bacteria present in manure, we detected many bacterial sequences for organisms, such as Globicatella sulfidofaciens, Corynebacterium ammoniagenes, Corynebacterium urealyticum, Clostridium aminovalericum, Arthrobacter sp., and Denitrobacter permanens, that may be involved in the degradation of wood and cycling of nitrogen and sulfur. Several sequences were identified in the library for bacteria associated with disease in humans and poultry such as clostridia, staphylococci, and Bordetella spp. However, specific PCR targeting other human and veterinary pathogens did not detect the presence of Salmonella, pathogenic Escherichia coli, Campylobacter spp., Yersinia spp., Listeria spp., or toxigenic staphylococci. PCR and DNA hybridization revealed the presence of class 1 integrons with gene cassettes that specify resistance to aminoglycosides and chloramphenicol. Only from understanding the microbial community of animal wastes such as poultry litter can we manage animal disease and limit the impact of animal waste on the environment and human and animal health.

Indexed as

AnimalsBacteriaChickensDNA, RibosomalEcosystemManureMolecular Sequence DataNucleic Acid HybridizationPolymerase Chain ReactionRNA, Ribosomal, 16SSequence Analysis, DNADNA, RibosomalManureRNA, Ribosomal, 16S

Identifiers

PMID12571010
PMCPMC143620

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.