Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24586349›Full record

ArticlePloS one2014

Evaluation of the efficacy and safety of a marine-derived Bacillus strain for use as an in-feed probiotic for newly weaned pigs.

Maria Luz Prieto, Laurie O'Sullivan, Shiau Pin Tan, Peter McLoughlin, Helen Hughes, Orla O'Donovan, Mary C Rea, Robert M Kent, Joseph P Cassidy, Gillian E Gardiner and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing 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

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Marine-DerivedInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Effects ofAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2020
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

11 authors.

Maria Luz PrietoEco-Innovation Research Centre, Department of Chemical and Life Sciences, Waterford Institute of Technology, Waterford, Ireland.
Laurie O'SullivanEco-Innovation Research Centre, Department of Chemical and Life Sciences, Waterford Institute of Technology, Waterford, Ireland.
Shiau Pin TanEco-Innovation Research Centre, Department of Chemical and Life Sciences, Waterford Institute of Technology, Waterford, Ireland.
Peter McLoughlinEco-Innovation Research Centre, Department of Chemical and Life Sciences, Waterford Institute of Technology, Waterford, Ireland.
Helen HughesEco-Innovation Research Centre, Department of Chemical and Life Sciences, Waterford Institute of Technology, Waterford, Ireland.
Orla O'DonovanEco-Innovation Research Centre, Department of Chemical and Life Sciences, Waterford Institute of Technology, Waterford, Ireland.
Mary C ReaTeagasc, Food Research Centre, Moorepark, Fermoy, Co. Cork, Ireland ; Alimentary Pharmabiotic Centre, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland.
Robert M KentEco-Innovation Research Centre, Department of Chemical and Life Sciences, Waterford Institute of Technology, Waterford, Ireland ; Teagasc, Food Research Centre, Moorepark, Fermoy, Co. Cork, Ireland.
Joseph P CassidyVeterinary Sciences Centre, University College Dublin, Belfield, Dublin, Ireland.
Gillian E GardinerEco-Innovation Research Centre, Department of Chemical and Life Sciences, Waterford Institute of Technology, Waterford, Ireland.
Peadar G LawlorPig Development Department, Animal and Grassland Research and Innovation Centre, Teagasc, Moorepark, Fermoy, Co. Cork, Ireland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Forty eight individual pigs (8.7±0.26 kg) weaned at 28±1 d of age were used in a 22-d study to evaluate the effect of oral administration of a Bacillus pumilus spore suspension on growth performance and health indicators. Treatments (n = 16) were: (1) non-medicated diet; (2) medicated diet with apramycin (200 mg/kg) and pharmacological levels of zinc oxide (2,500 mg zinc/kg) and (3) B. pumilus diet (non-medicated diet + 10(10) spores/day B. pumilus). Final body weight and average daily gain tended to be lower (P = 0.07) and feed conversion ratio was worsened (P<0.05) for the medicated treatment compared to the B. pumilus treatment. Ileal E. coli counts were lower for the B. pumilus and medicated treatments compared to the non-medicated treatment (P<0.05), perhaps as a result of increased ileal propionic acid concentrations (P<0.001). However, the medicated treatment reduced fecal (P<0.001) and cecal (P<0.05) Lactobacillus counts and tended to reduce the total cecal short chain fatty acid (SCFA) concentration (P = 0.10). Liver weights were lighter and concentrations of liver enzymes higher (P<0.05) in pigs on the medicated treatment compared to those on the non-medicated or B. pumilus treatments. Pigs on the B. pumilus treatment had lower overall lymphocyte and higher granulocyte percentages (P<0.001) and higher numbers of jejunal goblet cells (P<0.01) than pigs on either of the other two treatments or the non-medicated treatment, respectively. However, histopathological examination of the small intestine, kidneys and liver revealed no abnormalities. Overall, the B. pumilus treatment decreased ileal E. coli counts in a manner similar to the medicated treatment but without the adverse effects on growth performance, Lactobacillus counts, cecal SCFA concentration and possible liver toxicity experienced with the medicated treatment.

Indexed as

Animal FeedBacillusMarine BiologyProbioticsWeaningAnimalsEscherichia coliFemaleHydrogen-Ion ConcentrationIntestinesLactobacillusMaleOrgan SizeSwine

Identifiers

PMID24586349
PMCPMC3935854

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.