Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29577087›Full record

ArticlemSystems

Fecal Microbiota Transplantation in Gestating Sows and Neonatal Offspring Alters Lifetime Intestinal Microbiota and Growth in Offspring.

Ursula M McCormack, Tânia Curião, Toby Wilkinson, Barbara U Metzler-Zebeli, Henry Reyer, Tomas Ryan, Julia A Calderon-Diaz, Fiona Crispie, Paul D Cotter, Christopher J Creevey and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in mSystems. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 46 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
46citing papers in PubMed
5.1field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

46 citing papers in PubMed, 75 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Effects of concentrated fecal microbiota transplant on the equine fecal microbiota after antibiotic-induced dysbiosis.Canadian journal of veterinary research = Revue canadienne de recherche veterinaire · 2023
    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

12 authors at 5 institutions in 5 countries.

Ursula M McCormack *Teagasc, Pig Development Department, Animal and Grassland Research and Innovation Centre, Moorepark, Fermoy, County Cork, Ireland.
Tânia Curião *Teagasc, Pig Development Department, Animal and Grassland Research and Innovation Centre, Moorepark, Fermoy, County Cork, Ireland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5269-0387
Toby WilkinsonAnimal and Microbial Sciences, Institute of Biological, Environmental and Rural Sciences (IBERS), Aberystwyth University, Aberystwyth, United Kingdom.
Barbara U Metzler-ZebeliInstitute of Animal Nutrition and Functional Plant Compounds, University Clinic for Swine, University of Veterinary Medicine Vienna, Vienna, Austria.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2413-4957
Henry ReyerLeibeniz institute (FBN), Dummerstorf, Germany.
Tomas RyanTeagasc, Pig Development Department, Animal and Grassland Research and Innovation Centre, Moorepark, Fermoy, County Cork, Ireland.
Julia A Calderon-DiazTeagasc, Pig Development Department, Animal and Grassland Research and Innovation Centre, Moorepark, Fermoy, County Cork, Ireland.
Fiona CrispieTeagasc Food Research Centre, Moorepark, Fermoy, County Cork, Ireland.
Paul D CotterTeagasc Food Research Centre, Moorepark, Fermoy, County Cork, Ireland.
Christopher J CreeveyAnimal and Microbial Sciences, Institute of Biological, Environmental and Rural Sciences (IBERS), Aberystwyth University, Aberystwyth, United Kingdom.
Gillian E GardinerDepartment of Science, Waterford Institute of Technology, Waterford, Ireland.
Peadar G LawlorTeagasc, Pig Development Department, Animal and Grassland Research and Innovation Centre, Moorepark, Fermoy, County Cork, Ireland.
Teagasc - The Irish Agriculture and Food Development Authority · IEAberystwyth University · GBResearch Institute for Farm Animal Biology (FBN) · DEUniversity of Veterinary Medicine Vienna · ATWaterford Institute of Technology · IE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Previous studies suggest a link between intestinal microbiota and porcine feed efficiency (FE). Therefore, we investigated whether fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) in sows and/or neonatal offspring, using inocula derived from highly feed-efficient pigs, could improve offspring FE. Pregnant sows were assigned to control or FMT treatments and the subsequent offspring to control treatment, FMT once (at birth), or FMT four times (between birth and weaning). FMT altered sow fecal and colostrum microbiota compositions and resulted in lighter offspring body weight at 70 and 155 days of age when administered to sows and/or offspring. This was accompanied by FMT-associated changes within the offspring's intestinal microbiota, mostly in the ileum. These included transiently higher fecal bacterial diversity and load and numerous compositional differences at the phylum and genus levels (e.g.,

Indexed as

fecal microbiota transplantationfeed efficiencyintestinal microbiotapigs

Identifiers

PMID29577087
PMCPMC5864416
OpenAlexW2794096316

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.