Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32988529›Full record

ArticlePoultry science2020

Effects of wheat bran in comparison to antibiotics on growth performance, intestinal immunity, barrier function, and microbial composition in broiler chickens.

Q H Shang, S J Liu, T F He, H S Liu, S Mahfuz, X K Ma, X S Piao

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Poultry science, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
5.3field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 54 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. DietaryVeterinary world · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Effect ofAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2022
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Effects of Wheat Bran andAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2020
    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 1 institution in 1 country.

Q H ShangState Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition, College of Animal Science and Technology, China Agricultural University, Beijing 100193, China.
S J LiuState Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition, College of Animal Science and Technology, China Agricultural University, Beijing 100193, China.
T F HeState Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition, College of Animal Science and Technology, China Agricultural University, Beijing 100193, China.
H S LiuState Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition, College of Animal Science and Technology, China Agricultural University, Beijing 100193, China.
S MahfuzState Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition, College of Animal Science and Technology, China Agricultural University, Beijing 100193, China.
X K MaState Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition, College of Animal Science and Technology, China Agricultural University, Beijing 100193, China.
X S PiaoState Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition, College of Animal Science and Technology, China Agricultural University, Beijing 100193, China. Electronic address: piaoxsh@cau.edu.cn.
China Agricultural University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This experiment was conducted to evaluate the effects of wheat bran (WB) and antibiotics on growth performance, intestinal immunity, barrier function, and microbial composition in broiler chickens. A total of 168 one-day-old male Arbor Acre chicks were allocated to 3 treatments consisting of 7 replicates with 8 birds per replicate. The 3 treatments were: an antibiotic-free control diet (control, CON), CON + 75 mg/kg chlortetracycline as an antibiotic growth promoter (AGP), and CON + 3% WB. Birds fed AGP and WB had greater (P < 0.05) ADG during days 1 to 21 and lower (P < 0.05) feed-to-gain ratio during each phase than those fed CON. The WB supplementation reduced (P < 0.05) serum concentrations of tumor necrosis factor-α and diamine oxidase activity compared with CON on both day 21 and 42. The AGP and WB supplementation decreased (P < 0.05) interleukin-1β concentration in jejunal mucosa on day 21 and increased (P < 0.05) secretory immunoglobulin A concentration in jejunal mucosa on day 21 and 42. The relative expression of occludin in jejunal mucosa was upregulated (P < 0.05) in WB than in CON on day 21. Moreover, both AGP and WB supplementation upregulated (P < 0.05) the relative expression of zonula occludens-1 in jejunal mucosa on day 21 and 42. The WB supplementation enhanced the α-diversity of cecal microbiota, as evidenced by the increased Shannon index (P < 0.05). At the phylum level, the phylum Firmicutes was enriched (P < 0.05) in WB. At the genus level, the WB supplementation enriched (P < 0.05) Lachnoclostridium and Butyricicoccus. The WB supplementation increased (P < 0.05) cecal total short chain fatty acids concentrations on day 21 and 42, and butyric acid concentrations on day 42 compared with CON. Collectively, supplementation of 3% WB could promote growth by improving intestinal immunity, barrier function, and microbial composition in broilers. Thus, WB may have a role in replacing antibiotics for improved growth performance and intestinal health in broilers.

Indexed as

Anti-Bacterial AgentsChickensDietary FiberGastrointestinal MicrobiomeIntestinesAnimal FeedAnimalsDietMaleAnti-Bacterial AgentsDietary Fiberbarrier functionbroilerimmunitymicrobial compositionperformance

Identifiers

PMID32988529
PMCPMC7598142
OpenAlexW3038672098

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.