Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33499936›Full record

ArticleAnimal microbiome2019

Take care of the environment: housing conditions affect the interplay of nutritional interventions and intestinal microbiota in broiler chickens.

Jannigje G Kers, Francisca C Velkers, Egil A J Fischer, Gerben D A Hermes, David M Lamot, J Arjan Stegeman, Hauke Smidt

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Animal microbiome, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing 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

33 citing papers in PubMed, 58 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Diet-vaccine interactions: SQM Iron andApplied and environmental microbiology · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Jannigje G KersFaculty of Veterinary Medicine, Department of Farm Animal Health, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands. j.g.kers@uu.nl.
Francisca C VelkersFaculty of Veterinary Medicine, Department of Farm Animal Health, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Egil A J FischerFaculty of Veterinary Medicine, Department of Farm Animal Health, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Gerben D A HermesLaboratory of Microbiology, Wageningen University and Research, Wageningen, the Netherlands.
David M LamotCargill Animal Nutrition Innovation Center, Velddriel, the Netherlands.
J Arjan StegemanFaculty of Veterinary Medicine, Department of Farm Animal Health, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Hauke SmidtLaboratory of Microbiology, Wageningen University and Research, Wageningen, the Netherlands.
Utrecht University · NLWageningen University & Research · NLCargill (Netherlands) · NL

Funding

Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek 86815020
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe intestinal microbiota is shaped by many interactions between microorganisms, host, diet, and the environment. Exposure to microorganisms present in the environment, and exchange of microorganisms between hosts sharing the same environment, can influence intestinal microbiota of individuals, but how this affects microbiota studies is poorly understood. We investigated the effects of experimental housing circumstances on intestinal microbiota composition in broiler chickens, and how these effects may influence the capacity to determine diet related effects in a nutrition experiment. A cross-sectional experiment was conducted simultaneously in a feed research facility with mesh panels between pens (Housing condition 1, H1), in an extensively cleaned stable with floor pens with solid wooden panels (H2), and in isolators (H3). In H1 and H2 different distances between pens were created to assess gut microbiota exchange between pens. Feed with and without a blend of medium-chain fatty acids (MCFA) was used to create differences in cecal microbiota between pens or isolators within the same housing condition. Male one-day-old Ross broiler chickens (n = 370) were randomly distributed across H1, H2, and H3. After 35 days cecal microbiota composition was assessed by 16S ribosomal RNA gene amplicon sequencing. Metabolic functioning of cecal content was assessed based on high-performance liquid chromatography.

resultsMicrobial alpha diversity was not affected in broilers fed +MCFA in H1 but was increased in H2 and H3. Based on weighted UniFrac distances, the nutritional intervention explained 10%, whereas housing condition explained 28% of cecal microbiota variation between all broilers. The effect size of the nutritional intervention varied within housing conditions between 11, 27, and 13% for H1, H2, and H3. Furthermore, performance and metabolic output were significantly different between housing conditions. The distance between pens within H1 and H2 did not influence the percentage of shared genera or operational taxonomic units (OTUs).

conclusionsThe cecal microbiota of broilers was modifiable by a nutritional intervention, but the housing condition affected microbiota composition and functionality stronger than the diet intervention. Consequently, for interpretation of intestinal microbiota studies in poultry it is essential to be aware of the potentially large impact of housing conditions on the obtained results.

Indexed as

16S rRNAFatty acidsMicrobiomePoultryTransmission

Identifiers

PMID33499936
PMCPMC7807522
OpenAlexW2970058337

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.