Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22806874›Full record

ArticleWorld journal of microbiology & biotechnology2012

Effects of chemical additives and ensiling time on whole plant wheat silage microbial profiles inferred by phenotypic and 16S ribosomal DNA analyses.

Emel Banu Buyukunal Bal, Mehmet Ali Bal

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in World journal of microbiology & biotechnology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Effects of the Application ofAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2020
    Article
  3. Bacterial Dynamics of Wheat Silage.Frontiers in microbiology · 2019
    Article
  4. 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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Emel Banu Buyukunal BalDepartment of Biology, Kahramanmaras Sutcu Imam University, Kahramanmaras, 46100, Turkey. banubal@ksu.edu.tr
Mehmet Ali Bal
Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam University · TR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The objectives of this study were to test the effects of various chemical additives, and ensiling time periods on microbial profiles of whole plant wheat silage (WPWS). WPWS was harvested at dough maturation stage, and ensiled with sodium chloride (T), sodium bicarbonate (N), sucrose (S), or urea (U) at 1% dry matter (DM) (w/w). Each WPWS treatment (i.e. T, N, S, and U) was ensiled in 1 dm(3) duplicate anaerobic jars for 7, 14, 28, 35, 42, 49, and 56 days. The highest lactic acid concentration was detected for U (5.9% DM) compared to the control (0.5% DM) at day 56. Similarly, the highest ammonia concentration was observed for U (9.3% DM) compared to the control; T, N, and S treatments averaged 2.4% DM. A higher lactic acid bacteria (LAB) count was observed between days 14 and 56 for all treatments relative to control WPWS, which averaged 6.7 and 5.6 c.f.u./g of fresh material, respectively. The highest quality silage was observed for N and U treated WPWS, with an absence of yeasts and molds from days 7 to 49. Identification of bacterial isolates at days 7 and 56 from each individual silage treatment was performed based on phenotypic (biochemical tests), and molecular (16S rDNA partial gene sequence) methods. 16S rDNA sequence results identified U7 and N56 isolates as Enterococcus faecium, and demonstrated positive galactose, ribose, lactose, maltose, mannitol, mannose, sucrose, and trehalose fermenting characteristics. In addition, most isolates exhibited growth potential in 6.5% NaCl. Overall sequence alignment results supported phenotypic identification, and indicated that U and N treated WPWS were LAB (Enterococcus) dominant compared to the control (non-LAB).

Indexed as

TriticumBacteriaLactobacillusPhylogenyPolymerase Chain ReactionRNA, Ribosomal, 16SSilageRNA, Ribosomal, 16S

Identifiers

PMID22806874
OpenAlexW1979113648

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.