ArticleWorld journal of microbiology & biotechnology2014
Characterization of rumen bacterial strains isolated from enrichments of rumen content in the presence of propolis.
Article in World journal of microbiology & biotechnology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Oral Administration of Propolis and Lysozyme Combination Improves Feline Oral Health and Modulates Systemic Inflammatory and Oxidative Responses.Antioxidants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Effect of Growth Media on the Diversity ofMicroorganisms · 2022Article
- Unraveling the camel rumen microbiome through metaculturomics approach for agriculture waste hydrolytic potential.Archives of microbiology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Propolis presents many biological properties, including antibacterial activities, and has been proposed as an additive in ruminant nutrition. Twenty bacterial strains, previously isolated from enrichments of Brazilian cow rumen contents in the presence of different propolis extracts (LLOS), were characterized using phenotyping and 16S rRNA identification. Seven strains were assigned to Streptococcus sp., most likely S. bovis, and were all degrading starch. One amylolytic lactate-utilizing strain of Selenomonas ruminantium was also found. Two strains of Clostridium bifermentans were identified and showed proteolytic activity. Two strains were assigned to Mitsuokella jalaludinii and were saccharolytic. One strain belonged to a Bacillus species and seven strains were affiliated with Escherichia coli. All of the 20 strains were able to use many sugars, but none of them were able to degrade the polysaccharides carboxymethylcellulose and xylans. The effect of three propolis extracts (LLOS B1, C1 and C3) was tested on the in vitro growth of four representative isolates of S. bovis, E. coli, M. jalaludinii and C. bifermentans. The growth of S. bovis, E. coli and M. jalaludinii was not affected by the three propolis extracts at 1 mg ml(-1). C. bifermentans growth was completely inhibited at this LLOS concentration, but this bacterium was partially resistant at lower concentrations. LLOS C3, with the lower concentration of phenolic compounds, was a little less inhibitory than B1 and C1 on this strain.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.