Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27340760›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2016

Assessing quality of Medicago sativa silage by monitoring bacterial composition with single molecule, real-time sequencing technology and various physiological parameters.

Weichen Bao, Zhihui Mi, Haiyan Xu, Yi Zheng, Lai Yu Kwok, Heping Zhang, Wenyi Zhang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing 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

29 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Frontiers in microbiology · 2022
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Microbial Community, Fermentation Quality, andFrontiers in microbiology · 2022
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Effects of Citric Acid andFrontiers in microbiology · 2021
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  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

7 authors.

Weichen BaoKey Laboratory of Dairy Biotechnology and Engineering, Ministry of Education, Inner Mongolia Agricultural University, Hohhot, Inner Mongolia 010018, China.
Zhihui MiKey Laboratory of Dairy Biotechnology and Engineering, Ministry of Education, Inner Mongolia Agricultural University, Hohhot, Inner Mongolia 010018, China.
Haiyan XuKey Laboratory of Dairy Biotechnology and Engineering, Ministry of Education, Inner Mongolia Agricultural University, Hohhot, Inner Mongolia 010018, China.
Yi ZhengKey Laboratory of Dairy Biotechnology and Engineering, Ministry of Education, Inner Mongolia Agricultural University, Hohhot, Inner Mongolia 010018, China.
Lai Yu KwokKey Laboratory of Dairy Biotechnology and Engineering, Ministry of Education, Inner Mongolia Agricultural University, Hohhot, Inner Mongolia 010018, China.
Heping ZhangKey Laboratory of Dairy Biotechnology and Engineering, Ministry of Education, Inner Mongolia Agricultural University, Hohhot, Inner Mongolia 010018, China.
Wenyi ZhangKey Laboratory of Dairy Biotechnology and Engineering, Ministry of Education, Inner Mongolia Agricultural University, Hohhot, Inner Mongolia 010018, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The present study applied the PacBio single molecule, real-time sequencing technology (SMRT) in evaluating the quality of silage production. Specifically, we produced four types of Medicago sativa silages by using four different lactic acid bacteria-based additives (AD-I, AD-II, AD-III and AD-IV). We monitored the changes in pH, organic acids (including butyric acid, the ratio of acetic acid/lactic acid, γ-aminobutyric acid, 4-hyroxy benzoic acid and phenyl lactic acid), mycotoxins, and bacterial microbiota during silage fermentation. Our results showed that the use of the additives was beneficial to the silage fermentation by enhancing a general pH and mycotoxin reduction, while increasing the organic acids content. By SMRT analysis of the microbial composition in eight silage samples, we found that the bacterial species number and relative abundances shifted apparently after fermentation. Such changes were specific to the LAB species in the additives. Particularly, Bacillus megaterium was the initial dominant species in the raw materials; and after the fermentation process, Pediococcus acidilactici and Lactobacillus plantarum became the most prevalent species, both of which were intrinsically present in the LAB additives. Our data have demonstrated that the SMRT sequencing platform is applicable in assessing the quality of silage.

Indexed as

Molecular TypingAcetic AcidAnimal FeedFermentationHydrogen-Ion ConcentrationLactic AcidLactobacillusMedicago sativaMycotoxinsQuality ControlReal-Time Polymerase Chain ReactionRNA, Ribosomal, 16SSequence Analysis, DNASilageAcetic AcidLactic AcidMycotoxinsRNA, Ribosomal, 16S

Identifiers

PMID27340760
PMCPMC4920031

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.