Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31250899›Full record

ReviewJournal of animal science2019

BOARD INVITED REVIEW: The pig microbiota and the potential for harnessing the power of the microbiome to improve growth and health1.

Nirosh D Aluthge, Dana M Van Sambeek, Erin E Carney-Hinkle, Yanshuo S Li, Samodha C Fernando, Thomas E Burkey

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of animal science, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

37 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2024
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2023
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  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

6 authors.

Nirosh D AluthgeDepartment of Animal Science, University of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE.
Dana M Van SambeekDepartment of Animal Science, University of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE.
Erin E Carney-HinkleDepartment of Animal Science, University of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE.
Yanshuo S LiDepartment of Animal Science, University of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE.
Samodha C FernandoDepartment of Animal Science, University of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE.
Thomas E BurkeyDepartment of Animal Science, University of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A variety of microorganisms inhabit the gastrointestinal tract of animals including bacteria, archaea, fungi, protozoa, and viruses. Pioneers in gut microbiology have stressed the critical importance of diet:microbe interactions and how these interactions may contribute to health status. As scientists have overcome the limitations of culture-based microbiology, the importance of these interactions has become more clear even to the extent that the gut microbiota has emerged as an important immunologic and metabolic organ. Recent advances in metagenomics and metabolomics have helped scientists to demonstrate that interactions among the diet, the gut microbiota, and the host to have profound effects on animal health and disease. However, although scientists have now accumulated a great deal of data with respect to what organisms comprise the gastrointestinal landscape, there is a need to look more closely at causative effects of the microbiome. The objective of this review is intended to provide: 1) a review of what is currently known with respect to the dynamics of microbial colonization of the porcine gastrointestinal tract; 2) a review of the impact of nutrient:microbe effects on growth and health; 3) examples of the therapeutic potential of prebiotics, probiotics, and synbiotics; and 4) a discussion about what the future holds with respect to microbiome research opportunities and challenges. Taken together, by considering what is currently known in the four aforementioned areas, our overarching goal is to set the stage for narrowing the path towards discovering how the porcine gut microbiota (individually and collectively) may affect specific host phenotypes.

Indexed as

Gastrointestinal MicrobiomePrebioticsProbioticsSynbioticsAnimalsDietGastrointestinal TractMetabolomicsSwinePrebioticsgastrointestinalhealthmicrobiomenutrient–microbiome interactionspigs

Identifiers

PMID31250899
PMCPMC6735911

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.