Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23844101›Full record

ArticlePloS one2013

The effects of a probiotic yeast on the bacterial diversity and population structure in the rumen of cattle.

Eric Pinloche, Neil McEwan, Jean-Philippe Marden, Corinne Bayourthe, Eric Auclair, C Jamie Newbold

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 60 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
60citing papers in PubMed
17.8field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

60 citing papers in PubMed, 192 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Long-TermAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Influence of theVeterinary world · 2024
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Dose effect of Actisaf Sc 47 yeast probiotic (Translational animal science · 2024
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Meta-analysis ofHeliyon · 2023
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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 at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Eric PinlocheInstitute of Biological, Environmental and Rural Sciences, Aberystwyth University, Aberystwyth, United Kingdom.
Neil McEwan
Jean-Philippe Marden
Corinne Bayourthe
Eric Auclair
C Jamie Newbold
Aberystwyth University · GBLesaffre (France) · FRInstitute of Biological, Environmental and Rural Sciences · GBInstitut National de la Recherche Agronomique · MA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

It has been suggested that the ability of live yeast to improve milk yield and weight gain in cattle is because the yeast stimulates bacterial activity within the rumen. However it remains unclear if this is a general stimulation of all species or a specific stimulation of certain species. Here we characterised the change in the bacterial population within the rumen of cattle fed supplemental live yeast. Three cannulated lactating cows received a daily ration (24 kg/d) of corn silage (61% of DM), concentrates (30% of DM), dehydrated alfalfa (9% of DM) and a minerals and vitamins mix (1% of DM). The effect of yeast (BIOSAF SC 47, Lesaffre Feed Additives, France; 0.5 or 5 g/d) was compared to a control (no additive) in a 3 × 3 Latin square design. The variation in the rumen bacterial community between treatments was assessed using Serial Analysis of V1 Ribosomal Sequence Tag (SARST-V1) and 454 pyrosequencing based on analysis of the 16S rRNA gene. Compared to the control diet supplementation of probiotic yeast maintained a healthy fermentation in the rumen of lactating cattle (higher VFA concentration [high yeast dose only], higher rumen pH, and lower Eh and lactate). These improvements were accompanied with a shift in the main fibrolytic group (Fibrobacter and Ruminococcus) and lactate utilising bacteria (Megasphaera and Selenomonas). In addition we have shown that the analysis of short V1 region of 16s rRNA gene (50-60 bp) could give as much phylogenetic information as a longer read (454 pyrosequencing of 250 bp). This study also highlights the difficulty of drawing conclusions on composition and diversity of complex microbiota because of the variation caused by the use of different methods (sequencing technology and/or analysis).

Indexed as

BiodiversityAnimal FeedAnimalsBacteriaCattleCluster AnalysisDNA, BacterialFemaleGenetic VariationLactationMicrobiotaPhylogenyPolymerase Chain ReactionPolymorphism, Restriction Fragment LengthPopulation DynamicsProbioticsDNA, BacterialRNA, Ribosomal, 16S

Identifiers

PMID23844101
PMCPMC3699506
OpenAlexW2094806584

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.