Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31226709›Full record

ArticlePoultry science2019

Differences in gut microbiota composition of laying hen lines divergently selected on feather pecking.

Jerine A J van der Eijk, Hugo de Vries, Joergen B Kjaer, Marc Naguib, Bas Kemp, Hauke Smidt, T Bas Rodenburg, Aart Lammers

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 32 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

32 citing papers in PubMed, 54 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. The Impact of ProbioticAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2022
    Review
  18. Microorganisms · 2022
    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

8 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Jerine A J van der EijkBehavioural Ecology Group, Department of Animal Sciences, Wageningen University & Research, 6708 WD Wageningen, the Netherlands.
Hugo de VriesLaboratory of Microbiology, Wageningen University & Research, 6708 WE Wageningen, the Netherlands.
Joergen B KjaerFriedrich-Loeffler-Institut, Federal Research Institute for Animal Health, Institute of Animal Welfare and Animal Husbandry, 29223 Celle, Germany.
Marc NaguibBehavioural Ecology Group, Department of Animal Sciences, Wageningen University & Research, 6708 WD Wageningen, the Netherlands.
Bas KempAdaptation Physiology Group, Department of Animal Sciences, Wageningen University & Research, 6708 WD Wageningen, the Netherlands.
Hauke SmidtLaboratory of Microbiology, Wageningen University & Research, 6708 WE Wageningen, the Netherlands.
T Bas RodenburgBehavioural Ecology Group, Department of Animal Sciences, Wageningen University & Research, 6708 WD Wageningen, the Netherlands.
Aart LammersAdaptation Physiology Group, Department of Animal Sciences, Wageningen University & Research, 6708 WD Wageningen, the Netherlands.
Wageningen University & Research · NLFriedrich-Loeffler-Institut · DEUtrecht University · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Feather pecking (FP), a damaging behavior where laying hens peck and pull at feathers of conspecifics, is multifactorial and has been linked to numerous behavioral and physiological characteristics. The gut microbiota has been shown to influence host behavior and physiology in many species, and could therefore affect the development of damaging behaviors, such as FP. Yet, it is unknown whether FP genotypes (high FP [HFP] and low FP [LFP] lines) or FP phenotypes (i.e., individuals differing in FP, feather peckers and neutrals) differ in their gut microbiota composition. Therefore, we identified mucosa-associated microbiota composition of the ileum and cecum at 10 and 30 wk of age. At 30 wk of age, we further identified luminal microbiota composition from combined content of the ileum, ceca, and colon. FP phenotypes could not be distinguished from each other in mucosa-associated or luminal microbiota composition. However, HFP neutrals were characterized by a higher relative abundance of genera of Clostridiales, but lower relative abundance of Lactobacillus for the luminal microbiota composition compared to LFP phenotypes. Furthermore, HFP neutrals had a higher diversity and evenness for the luminal microbiota compared to LFP phenotypes. FP genotypes could not be distinguished from each other in mucosa-associated microbiota composition. Yet, FP genotypes could be distinguished from each other in luminal microbiota composition. HFP birds were characterized by a higher relative abundance of genera of Clostridiales, but lower relative abundance of Staphylococcus and Lactobacillus compared to LFP birds. Furthermore, HFP birds had a higher diversity and evenness for both cecal mucosa-associated and luminal microbiota compared to LFP birds at adult age. In conclusion, we here show that divergent selection on FP can (in)directly affect luminal microbiota composition. Whether differences in microbiota composition are causal to FP or a consequence of FP remains to be elucidated.

Indexed as

Behavior, AnimalFeathersGastrointestinal MicrobiomeAggressionAnimalsBacteriaChickensFemaleGenotypecompositionfeather peckinggenotypegut microbiotaphenotype

Identifiers

PMID31226709
PMCPMC6869756
OpenAlexW2951639417

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.