Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24123741›Full record

ArticleApplied and environmental microbiology2013

Feeding the probiotic Enterococcus faecium strain NCIMB 10415 to piglets specifically reduces the number of Escherichia coli pathotypes that adhere to the gut mucosa.

Carmen Bednorz, Sebastian Guenther, Kathrin Oelgeschläger, Bianca Kinnemann, Robert Pieper, Susanne Hartmann, Karsten Tedin, Torsten Semmler, Konrad Neumann, Peter Schierack and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Applied and environmental microbiology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed
–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

39 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Combined Dietary Supplementation ofVeterinary sciences · 2024
    Article
  4. Nutrients · 2023
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Molecular Characterization ofArchives of Razi Institute · 2023
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Impact ofVeterinary and animal science · 2021
    Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. The Many Faces ofMicroorganisms · 2021
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Gut health: The results of microbial and mucosal immune interactions in pigs.Animal nutrition (Zhongguo xu mu shou yi xue hui) · 2021
    Review
  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

12 authors.

Carmen BednorzInstitute of Microbiology and Epizootics, Freie Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Sebastian Guenther
Kathrin Oelgeschläger
Bianca Kinnemann
Robert Pieper
Susanne Hartmann
Karsten Tedin
Torsten Semmler
Konrad Neumann
Peter Schierack
Astrid Bethe
Lothar H Wieler

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Feed supplementation with the probiotic Enterococcus faecium for piglets has been found to reduce pathogenic gut microorganisms. Since Escherichia coli is among the most important pathogens in pig production, we performed comprehensive analyses to gain further insight into the influence of E. faecium NCIMB 10415 on porcine intestinal E. coli. A total of 1,436 E. coli strains were isolated from three intestinal habitats (mucosa, digesta, and feces) of probiotic-supplemented and nonsupplemented (control) piglets. E. coli bacteria were characterized via pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) for clonal analysis. The high diversity of E. coli was reflected by 168 clones. Multilocus sequence typing (MLST) was used to determine the phylogenetic backgrounds, revealing 79 sequence types (STs). Pathotypes of E. coli were further defined using multiplex PCR for virulence-associated genes. While these analyses discerned only a few significant differences in the E. coli population between the feeding groups, analyses distinguishing clones that were uniquely isolated in either the probiotic group only, the control group only, or both groups (shared group) revealed clear effects at the habitat level. Interestingly, extraintestinal pathogenic E. coli (ExPEC)-typical clones adhering to the mucosa were significantly reduced in the probiotic group. Our data show a minor influence of E. faecium on the overall population of E. coli in healthy piglets. In contrast, this probiotic has a profound effect on mucosa-adherent E. coli. This finding further substantiates a specific effect of E. faecium strain NCIMB 10415 in piglets against pathogenic E. coli in the intestine. In addition, these data question the relevance of data based on sampling fecal E. coli only.

Indexed as

AnimalsCluster AnalysisDietElectrophoresis, Gel, Pulsed-FieldEnterococcus faeciumEscherichia coliFecesGastrointestinal TractGenotypeIntestinal MucosaMultilocus Sequence TypingMultiplex Polymerase Chain ReactionPhylogenyProbioticsSwineTreatment OutcomeVirulence Factors

Identifiers

PMID24123741
PMCPMC3837809

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.