Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32153533›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in microbiology2020

Changes in the Solid-, Liquid-, and Epithelium-Associated Bacterial Communities in the Rumen of Hu Lambs in Response to Dietary Urea Supplementation.

Zhipeng Li, Chunlong Mu, Yixuan Xu, Junshi Shen, Weiyun Zhu

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in microbiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
7.7field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

29 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 44 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Translational animal science · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. The significance of N-carbamoylglutamate in ruminant production.Journal of animal science and biotechnology · 2023
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Microbiology spectrum · 2023
    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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Zhipeng LiLaboratory of Gastrointestinal Microbiology, Jiangsu Key Laboratory of Gastrointestinal Nutrition and Animal Health, College of Animal Science and Technology, Nanjing Agricultural University, Nanjing, China.
Chunlong MuLaboratory of Gastrointestinal Microbiology, Jiangsu Key Laboratory of Gastrointestinal Nutrition and Animal Health, College of Animal Science and Technology, Nanjing Agricultural University, Nanjing, China.
Yixuan XuLaboratory of Gastrointestinal Microbiology, Jiangsu Key Laboratory of Gastrointestinal Nutrition and Animal Health, College of Animal Science and Technology, Nanjing Agricultural University, Nanjing, China.
Junshi ShenLaboratory of Gastrointestinal Microbiology, Jiangsu Key Laboratory of Gastrointestinal Nutrition and Animal Health, College of Animal Science and Technology, Nanjing Agricultural University, Nanjing, China.
Weiyun ZhuLaboratory of Gastrointestinal Microbiology, Jiangsu Key Laboratory of Gastrointestinal Nutrition and Animal Health, College of Animal Science and Technology, Nanjing Agricultural University, Nanjing, China.
Nanjing Agricultural University · CNChinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The rumen bacteria in the solid, liquid, and epithelial fractions are distinct and play important roles in the degradation of urea nitrogen. However, the effects of urea on rumen bacteria from the three fractions remain unclear. In this study, 42 Hu lambs were fed a total mixed ration based on concentrate and roughage (55:45, dry matter basis) and randomly assigned to one of three experimental diets: a basal diet with no urea (UC, 0 g/kg), a basal diet supplemented with low urea levels (LU, 10 g/kg DM), and a basal diet supplemented with high urea levels (HU, 30 g/kg DM). After an 11-week feeding trial, six animals from each treatment were harvested. Rumen metabolites levels were measured, and bacteria of the rumen solid, liquid, and epithelial fractions were examined based on 16S rRNA gene sequencing. Under urea supplementation, the concentrations of ammonia and butyrate in the rumen increased, whereas the concentration of propionate decreased. The population of total protozoa was the highest in the LU treatment.

Indexed as

different microenvironmentepitheliumfermentation parameterrumen bacerial communityurea

Identifiers

PMID32153533
PMCPMC7046558
OpenAlexW3007836414

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.