Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30590796›Full record

ArticlePoultry science2019

Muscle characteristics in chicks challenged with Salmonella Enteritidis and the effect of preventive application of the probiotic Enterococcus faecium.

R Zitnan, E Albrecht, C Kalbe, C Miersch, V Revajova, M Levkut, M Röntgen

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Poultry science, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Effects of the ProbioticLife (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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 at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

R ZitnanNational Agriculture and Food Centre, Research Institute of Animal Production, Nitra, Kosice, Slovakia.
E AlbrechtInstitute of Muscle Biology and Growth, Leibniz Institute for Farm Animal Biology (FBN), Dummerstorf, Germany.
C KalbeInstitute of Muscle Biology and Growth, Leibniz Institute for Farm Animal Biology (FBN), Dummerstorf, Germany.
C MierschInstitute of Muscle Biology and Growth, Leibniz Institute for Farm Animal Biology (FBN), Dummerstorf, Germany.
V RevajovaDepartment of Pathological Anatomy, University of Veterinary Medicine and Pharmacy, Kosice, Slovakia.
M LevkutDepartment of Pathological Anatomy, University of Veterinary Medicine and Pharmacy, Kosice, Slovakia.
M RöntgenInstitute of Muscle Biology and Growth, Leibniz Institute for Farm Animal Biology (FBN), Dummerstorf, Germany.
Research Institute for Farm Animal Biology (FBN) · DEUniversity of Veterinary Medicine in Košice · SKNational Agricultural and Food Centre · SK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The present study was conducted to assess the effects of the probiotic Enterococcus faecium AL41 (EF) and of the enteric pathogen Salmonella Enteritidis PT4 (SE) on the development of posthatch pectoralis major muscle (PM) of broiler chicks. The four experimental groups were control (CON), EF, SE, and EF+SE (EFSE). EF and SE were given per os from days 1 to 7 and at day 4 posthatch, respectively. Muscle samples from 6 chicks per group were taken at day 8 (D8) and day 11 (D11) to evaluate PM myofiber growth, capillarization, DNA, RNA, and protein content, as well as enzyme activities (isocitrate dehydrogenase, lactate dehydrogenase, creatine kinase). PM growth rate was 7.45 ± 2.7 g/d in non-SE groups (CON, EF) and 5.10 ± 1.82 g/d in SE-infected groups (P < 0.02). Compared with group CON, application of bacteria (groups EF and SE) reduced the fiber cross-sectional area (246 and 262 vs. 347 ± 19 μm2) and the number of myonuclei per fiber (0.66 and 0.64 vs. 0.79 ± 0.03). At D11, hypertrophic myofiber growth normalized in the EF group, but negative effects persisted in SE and EFSE birds contributing to lower daily PM gain. In addition, SE infection strongly disturbed PM capillarization. Negative effects on capillary cross-sectional area and on the area (%) covered by capillaries persisted until D11 in the SE group, whereas pre-feeding of EF restored capillarization in the EFSE group to control levels. We conclude that supplementation of the probiotic bacteria EF AL41 had positive effects on PM capillarization and, thus, on delivery of O2, supply of nutrients, and removal of metabolites. Supplementation of probiotic bacteria might therefore reduce energetic stress and improve muscle health and meat quality during SE infection.

Indexed as

ChickensAnimal FeedAnimalsDietEnterococcus faeciumMuscle, SkeletalPoultry DiseasesProbioticsRandom AllocationSalmonella enteritidisSalmonella Infections, AnimalbroilerEnterococcusMuscleprobioticSalmonella

Identifiers

PMID30590796
PMCPMC6448134
OpenAlexW2905763441

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.