Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26664957›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in veterinary science2015

An Introduction to the Avian Gut Microbiota and the Effects of Yeast-Based Prebiotic-Type Compounds as Potential Feed Additives.

Stephanie M Roto, Peter M Rubinelli, Steven C Ricke

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in veterinary science, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 54 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
54citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
13.7field-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

54 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 129 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Characterizing probiotic properties of the Saccharomyces cerevisiae ABO1 strain isolated from toddy palm nectar.Brazilian journal of microbiology : [publication of the Brazilian Society for Microbiology] · 2026
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Effects of AddingAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. The Game for Three:Frontiers in microbiology · 2022
    Review
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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Stephanie M RotoDepartment of Food Science, Center for Food Safety, University of Arkansas , Fayetteville, AR , USA.
Peter M RubinelliDepartment of Food Science, Center for Food Safety, University of Arkansas , Fayetteville, AR , USA.
Steven C RickeDepartment of Food Science, Center for Food Safety, University of Arkansas , Fayetteville, AR , USA.
University of Arkansas at Fayetteville · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The poultry industry has been searching for a replacement for antibiotic growth promoters in poultry feed as public concerns over the use of antibiotics and the appearance of antibiotic resistance has become more intense. An ideal replacement would be feed amendments that could eliminate pathogens and disease while retaining economic value via improvements on body weight and feed conversion ratios. Establishing a healthy gut microbiota can have a positive impact on growth and development of both body weight and the immune system of poultry while reducing pathogen invasion and disease. The addition of prebiotics to poultry feed represents one such recognized way to establish a healthy gut microbiota. Prebiotics are feed additives, mainly in the form of specific types of carbohydrates that are indigestible to the host while serving as substrates to select beneficial bacteria and altering the gut microbiota. Beneficial bacteria in the ceca easily ferment commonly studied prebiotics, producing short-chain fatty acids, while pathogenic bacteria and the host are unable to digest their molecular bonds. Prebiotic-like substances are less commonly studied, but show promise in their effects on the prevention of pathogen colonization, improvements on the immune system, and host growth. Inclusion of yeast and yeast derivatives as probiotic and prebiotic-like substances, respectively, in animal feed has demonstrated positive associations with growth performance and modification of gut morphology. This review will aim to link together how such prebiotics and prebiotic-like substances function to influence the native and beneficial microorganisms that result in a diverse and well-developed gut microbiota.

Indexed as

Bifidobacteriumlactobacillusmicrobiotapoultryyeast

Identifiers

PMID26664957
PMCPMC4672232
OpenAlexW1916063365

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.