Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30547751›Full record

ArticleBMC microbiology2018

Evaluating the profound effect of gut microbiome on host appetite in pigs.

Hui Yang, Ming Yang, Shaoming Fang, Xiaochang Huang, Maozhang He, Shanlin Ke, Jun Gao, Jinyuan Wu, Yunyan Zhou, Hao Fu and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC microbiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 60 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
60citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.7field-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

60 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 107 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. AAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. 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

12 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Hui YangState Key Laboratory of Pig Genetic Improvement and Production Technology, Jiangxi Agricultural University, Nanchang, 330045, China.
Ming YangNational Engineering Research Center for Breeding Swine Industry, Guangdong Wens Foodstuff Co. Ltd., Xinxing, China.
Shaoming FangState Key Laboratory of Pig Genetic Improvement and Production Technology, Jiangxi Agricultural University, Nanchang, 330045, China.
Xiaochang HuangState Key Laboratory of Pig Genetic Improvement and Production Technology, Jiangxi Agricultural University, Nanchang, 330045, China.
Maozhang HeState Key Laboratory of Pig Genetic Improvement and Production Technology, Jiangxi Agricultural University, Nanchang, 330045, China.
Shanlin KeState Key Laboratory of Pig Genetic Improvement and Production Technology, Jiangxi Agricultural University, Nanchang, 330045, China.
Jun GaoState Key Laboratory of Pig Genetic Improvement and Production Technology, Jiangxi Agricultural University, Nanchang, 330045, China.
Jinyuan WuState Key Laboratory of Pig Genetic Improvement and Production Technology, Jiangxi Agricultural University, Nanchang, 330045, China.
Yunyan ZhouState Key Laboratory of Pig Genetic Improvement and Production Technology, Jiangxi Agricultural University, Nanchang, 330045, China.
Hao FuState Key Laboratory of Pig Genetic Improvement and Production Technology, Jiangxi Agricultural University, Nanchang, 330045, China.
Congying ChenState Key Laboratory of Pig Genetic Improvement and Production Technology, Jiangxi Agricultural University, Nanchang, 330045, China. chcy75@hotmail.com.ORCID 0000-0001-7112-448X
Lusheng HuangState Key Laboratory of Pig Genetic Improvement and Production Technology, Jiangxi Agricultural University, Nanchang, 330045, China.
Jiangxi Agricultural University · CNWen's Food Group (China) · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere are growing evidences showing that gut microbiota should play an important role in host appetite and feeding behavior. However, what kind of microbe(s) and how they affect porcine appetite remain unknown.

resultsIn this study, 280 commercial Duroc pigs were raised in a testing station with the circadian feeding behavior records for a continuous period of 30-100 kg. We first analyzed the influences of host gender and genetics in porcine average daily feed intake (ADFI), but no significant effect was observed. We found that the Prevotella-predominant enterotype had a higher ADFI than the Treponema enterotype-like group. Furthermore, 12 out of the 18 OTUs positively associated with the ADFI were annotated to Prevotella, and Prevotella was the hub bacteria in the co-abundance network. These results suggested that Prevotella might be a keystone bacterial taxon for increasing host feed intake. However, some bacteria producing short-chain fatty acids (SCFAs) and lactic acid (e.g. Ruminococcaceae and Lactobacillus) showed negative associations with the ADFI. Predicted function capacity analysis showed that the genes for amino acid biosynthesis had significantly different enrichment between pigs with high and low ADFI.

conclusionsThe present study provided important information on the profound effect of gut microbiota on porcine appetite and feeding behavior. This will profit us to regulate porcine appetite through modulating the gut microbiome in the pig industry.

Indexed as

AppetiteGastrointestinal MicrobiomeAnimalsBacteriaFatty Acids, VolatileFeeding BehaviorFemaleMalePhylogenySwineFatty Acids, Volatile16S rRNAEnterotypeFeed intakeFunction predictionGut microbiotaPig

Identifiers

PMID30547751
PMCPMC6295093
OpenAlexW2904436052

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.