Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28947748›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2017

Use of antimicrobial peptides as a feed additive for juvenile goats.

Qi Liu, Shuhua Yao, Yun Chen, Shuang Gao, Yanyi Yang, Junliang Deng, Zhihua Ren, Liuhong Shen, Hengmin Cui, Yanchun Hu and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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

30 citing papers in PubMed, 51 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Artificial intelligence catalyzes antimicrobial peptide design.Synthetic and systems biotechnology · 2027
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Antimicrobial peptides in livestock: a review with a one health approach.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2024
    Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. 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

12 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Qi LiuThe Key Laboratory of Animal Disease and Human Health of Sichuan Province, Key Laboratory of Environmental Hazard and Animal Disease of Sichuan Province, College of Veterinary Medicine, Sichuang Agricultural University, Chengdu Sichuang, 611130, China.
Shuhua YaoThe Key Laboratory of Animal Disease and Human Health of Sichuan Province, Key Laboratory of Environmental Hazard and Animal Disease of Sichuan Province, College of Veterinary Medicine, Sichuang Agricultural University, Chengdu Sichuang, 611130, China.
Yun ChenThe Key Laboratory of Animal Disease and Human Health of Sichuan Province, Key Laboratory of Environmental Hazard and Animal Disease of Sichuan Province, College of Veterinary Medicine, Sichuang Agricultural University, Chengdu Sichuang, 611130, China.
Shuang GaoThe Key Laboratory of Animal Disease and Human Health of Sichuan Province, Key Laboratory of Environmental Hazard and Animal Disease of Sichuan Province, College of Veterinary Medicine, Sichuang Agricultural University, Chengdu Sichuang, 611130, China.
Yanyi YangThe Key Laboratory of Animal Disease and Human Health of Sichuan Province, Key Laboratory of Environmental Hazard and Animal Disease of Sichuan Province, College of Veterinary Medicine, Sichuang Agricultural University, Chengdu Sichuang, 611130, China.
Junliang DengThe Key Laboratory of Animal Disease and Human Health of Sichuan Province, Key Laboratory of Environmental Hazard and Animal Disease of Sichuan Province, College of Veterinary Medicine, Sichuang Agricultural University, Chengdu Sichuang, 611130, China. dengjl213@126.com.
Zhihua RenThe Key Laboratory of Animal Disease and Human Health of Sichuan Province, Key Laboratory of Environmental Hazard and Animal Disease of Sichuan Province, College of Veterinary Medicine, Sichuang Agricultural University, Chengdu Sichuang, 611130, China.
Liuhong ShenThe Key Laboratory of Animal Disease and Human Health of Sichuan Province, Key Laboratory of Environmental Hazard and Animal Disease of Sichuan Province, College of Veterinary Medicine, Sichuang Agricultural University, Chengdu Sichuang, 611130, China.
Hengmin CuiThe Key Laboratory of Animal Disease and Human Health of Sichuan Province, Key Laboratory of Environmental Hazard and Animal Disease of Sichuan Province, College of Veterinary Medicine, Sichuang Agricultural University, Chengdu Sichuang, 611130, China.
Yanchun HuThe Key Laboratory of Animal Disease and Human Health of Sichuan Province, Key Laboratory of Environmental Hazard and Animal Disease of Sichuan Province, College of Veterinary Medicine, Sichuang Agricultural University, Chengdu Sichuang, 611130, China.
Xiaoping MaThe Key Laboratory of Animal Disease and Human Health of Sichuan Province, Key Laboratory of Environmental Hazard and Animal Disease of Sichuan Province, College of Veterinary Medicine, Sichuang Agricultural University, Chengdu Sichuang, 611130, China.
Shumin YuThe Key Laboratory of Animal Disease and Human Health of Sichuan Province, Key Laboratory of Environmental Hazard and Animal Disease of Sichuan Province, College of Veterinary Medicine, Sichuang Agricultural University, Chengdu Sichuang, 611130, China.
Sichuan Agricultural University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Although antimicrobial peptides (AMPs) have been used as feed additives, only a few studies have examined their use in ruminants. In this study, we evaluated the use of AMPs(recombinant swine defensin and a fly antibacterial peptide were mixed by 1:1) as a medicated feed additive for juvenile goats. Dietary treatments included control groups (group I: 300 g concentrate; group III: 600 g concentrate), and AMP-supplemented groups (group II: 300 g concentrate + 3.0 g AMPs; group IV: 600 g concentrate + 3.0 g AMPs). AMP-treated groups exhibited an increase in bacterial genera, including Fibrobacter, Anaerovibrio, and Succiniclasticum, and the ciliate genus Ophryoscolex; as well a reduction in bacterial genera, such as Selenomonas, Succinivibrio, and Treponema, and the ciliate genera Polyplastron, Entodinium, and Isotricha. The changes in Fibrobacter, Anaerovibrio, Ophryoscolex, Polyplastron, Entodinium, and Isotricha were related to the concentrate. AMP treatment led to increased body weight, average daily weight gain, enzymatic activity (pectinase, xylanase, and lipase), especially in the normal concentrate group, and influence on ruminal fermentation function. In addition, goats treated with AMPs had higher rumen microorganism diversity indices than the control groups. Our results demonstrate that AMPs can be utilized as feed additives for juvenile goats.

Indexed as

Animal FeedDietary SupplementsGoatsAnimalsAnti-Infective AgentsAntimicrobial Cationic PeptidesBody WeightGastrointestinal MicrobiomeGoat DiseasesRumenAnti-Infective AgentsAntimicrobial Cationic Peptides

Identifiers

PMID28947748
PMCPMC5612951
OpenAlexW2756420800

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.