Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26973642›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in microbiology2016

Epimural Indicator Phylotypes of Transiently-Induced Subacute Ruminal Acidosis in Dairy Cattle.

Stefanie U Wetzels, Evelyne Mann, Barbara U Metzler-Zebeli, Poulad Pourazad, Muhammad Qumar, Fenja Klevenhusen, Beate Pinior, Martin Wagner, Qendrim Zebeli, Stephan Schmitz-Esser

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in microbiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
7.8field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 47 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Metagenomic investigation of gastrointestinal microbiome in cattle.Asian-Australasian journal of animal sciences · 2017
    Review
  13. 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

10 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Stefanie U WetzelsDepartment for Farm Animals and Veterinary Public Health, Institute of Animal Nutrition and Functional Plant Compounds, University of Veterinary Medicine ViennaVienna, Austria; Department of Farm Animal and Public Health in Veterinary Medicine, Institute for Milk Hygiene, Milk Technology and Food Science, University of Veterinary Medicine ViennaVienna, Austria; Department for Farm Animals and Veterinary Public Health, Research Cluster Animal Gut Health, University of Veterinary Medicine ViennaVienna, Austria.
Evelyne MannDepartment of Farm Animal and Public Health in Veterinary Medicine, Institute for Milk Hygiene, Milk Technology and Food Science, University of Veterinary Medicine ViennaVienna, Austria; Department for Farm Animals and Veterinary Public Health, Research Cluster Animal Gut Health, University of Veterinary Medicine ViennaVienna, Austria.
Barbara U Metzler-ZebeliDepartment for Farm Animals and Veterinary Public Health, Research Cluster Animal Gut Health, University of Veterinary Medicine ViennaVienna, Austria; Department for Farm Animals and Veterinary Public Health, University Clinic for Swine, University of Veterinary Medicine ViennaVienna, Austria.
Poulad PourazadDepartment for Farm Animals and Veterinary Public Health, Institute of Animal Nutrition and Functional Plant Compounds, University of Veterinary Medicine Vienna Vienna, Austria.
Muhammad QumarDepartment for Farm Animals and Veterinary Public Health, Institute of Animal Nutrition and Functional Plant Compounds, University of Veterinary Medicine Vienna Vienna, Austria.
Fenja KlevenhusenDepartment for Farm Animals and Veterinary Public Health, Institute of Animal Nutrition and Functional Plant Compounds, University of Veterinary Medicine ViennaVienna, Austria; Department for Farm Animals and Veterinary Public Health, Research Cluster Animal Gut Health, University of Veterinary Medicine ViennaVienna, Austria.
Beate PiniorDepartment for Farm Animals and Veterinary Public Health, Institute for Veterinary Public Health, University of Veterinary Medicine Vienna Vienna, Austria.
Martin WagnerDepartment of Farm Animal and Public Health in Veterinary Medicine, Institute for Milk Hygiene, Milk Technology and Food Science, University of Veterinary Medicine ViennaVienna, Austria; Department for Farm Animals and Veterinary Public Health, Research Cluster Animal Gut Health, University of Veterinary Medicine ViennaVienna, Austria.
Qendrim ZebeliDepartment for Farm Animals and Veterinary Public Health, Institute of Animal Nutrition and Functional Plant Compounds, University of Veterinary Medicine ViennaVienna, Austria; Department for Farm Animals and Veterinary Public Health, Research Cluster Animal Gut Health, University of Veterinary Medicine ViennaVienna, Austria.
Stephan Schmitz-EsserDepartment of Farm Animal and Public Health in Veterinary Medicine, Institute for Milk Hygiene, Milk Technology and Food Science, University of Veterinary Medicine ViennaVienna, Austria; Department for Farm Animals and Veterinary Public Health, Research Cluster Animal Gut Health, University of Veterinary Medicine ViennaVienna, Austria; Department of Animal Science, Iowa State UniversityAmes, IA, USA.
University of Veterinary Medicine Vienna · ATIowa State University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The impact of a long-term subacute rumen acidosis (SARA) on the bovine epimural bacterial microbiome (BEBM) and its consequences for rumen health is poorly understood. This study aimed to investigate shifts in the BEBM during a long-term transient SARA model consisting of two concentrate-diet-induced SARA challenges separated by a 1-week challenge break. Eight cows were fed forage and varying concentrate amounts throughout the experiment. In total, 32 rumen papilla biopsies were taken for DNA isolation (4 sampling time points per cow: at the baseline before concentrate was fed, after the first SARA challenge, after the challenge break, and after the second SARA challenge). Ruminal pH was continuously monitored. The microbiome was determined using Illumina MiSeq sequencing of the 16S rRNA gene (V345 region). In total 1,215,618 sequences were obtained and clustered into 6833 operational taxonomic units (OTUs). Campylobacter and Kingella were the most abundant OTUs (16.5 and 7.1%). According to ruminal pH dynamics, the second challenge was more severe than the first challenge. Species diversity estimates and evenness increased during the challenge break compared to all other sampling time points (P < 0.05). During both SARA challenges, Kingella- and Azoarcus-OTUs decreased (0.5 and 0.4 fold-change) and a dominant Ruminobacter-OTU increased during the challenge break (18.9 fold-change; P < 0.05). qPCR confirmed SARA-related shifts. During the challenge break noticeably more OTUs increased compared to other sampling time points. Our results show that the BEBM re-establishes the baseline conditions slower after a SARA challenge than ruminal pH. Key phylotypes that were reduced during both challenges may help to establish a bacterial fingerprint to facilitate understanding effects of SARA conditions on the BEBM and their consequences for the ruminant host.

Indexed as

16S rRNA gene amplicon sequencingCampylobactercattlefeedingKingellalong-term subacute rumen acidosismicrobiotarumen epithelium

Identifiers

PMID26973642
PMCPMC4777738
OpenAlexW2298633920

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.