Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33499942›Full record

ArticleAnimal microbiome2020

Domesticated equine species and their derived hybrids differ in their fecal microbiota.

J E Edwards, A Schennink, F Burden, S Long, D A van Doorn, W F Pellikaan, J Dijkstra, E Saccenti, H Smidt

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Animal microbiome, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 34 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Description ofInternational journal of systematic and evolutionary microbiology · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Description ofbioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Dynamic Changes in the Gut Microbiota During Peripartum in Jennies.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025
    Article
  8. Review
  9. International journal of systematic and evolutionary microbiology · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Comparison of In Vivo and In Vitro Digestibility in Donkeys.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2020
    Article
  20. Anaerobic Fungi: Past, Present, and Future.Frontiers in microbiology · 2020
    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

9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

J E EdwardsLaboratory of Microbiology, Wageningen University & Research, 6708 WE, Wageningen, Netherlands. joanee2002@hotmail.com.
A SchenninkLaboratory of Microbiology, Wageningen University & Research, 6708 WE, Wageningen, Netherlands.
F BurdenThe Donkey Sanctuary, Sidmouth, Devon, EX10 ONU, UK.
S LongThe Donkey Sanctuary, Sidmouth, Devon, EX10 ONU, UK.
D A van DoornDivision of Nutrition, Department of Farm Animal Health, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Utrecht University, 3584 CM, Utrecht, Netherlands.
W F PellikaanAnimal Nutrition Group, Wageningen University & Research, 6708 WD, Wageningen, Netherlands.
J DijkstraAnimal Nutrition Group, Wageningen University & Research, 6708 WD, Wageningen, Netherlands.
E SaccentiLaboratory of Systems and Synthetic Biology, Wageningen University & Research, Wageningen, the Netherlands.
H SmidtLaboratory of Microbiology, Wageningen University & Research, 6708 WE, Wageningen, Netherlands. hauke.smidt@wur.nl.
Wageningen University & Research · NLUtrecht University · NL

Funding

H2020 Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions 706899
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCompared to horses and ponies, donkeys have increased degradation of dietary fiber. The longer total mean retention time of feed in the donkey gut has been proposed to be the basis of this, because of the increased time available for feed to be acted upon by enzymes and the gut microbiota. However, differences in terms of microbial concentrations and/or community composition in the hindgut may also underpin the increased degradation of fiber in donkeys. Therefore, a study was conducted to assess if differences existed between the fecal microbiota of pony, donkey and hybrids derived from them (i.e. pony × donkey) when fed the same forage diet.

resultsFecal community composition of prokaryotes and anaerobic fungi significantly differed between equine types. The relative abundance of two bacterial genera was significantly higher in donkey compared to both pony and pony x donkey: Lachnoclostridium 10 and 'probable genus 10' from the Lachnospiraceae family. The relative abundance of Piromyces was significantly lower in donkey compared to pony × donkey, with pony not significantly differing from either of the other equine types. In contrast, the uncultivated genus SK3 was only found in donkey (4 of the 8 animals). The number of anaerobic fungal OTUs was also significantly higher in donkey than in the other two equine types, with no significant differences found between pony and pony × donkey. Equine types did not significantly differ with respect to prokaryotic alpha diversity, fecal dry matter content or fecal concentrations of bacteria, archaea and anaerobic fungi.

conclusionsDonkey fecal microbiota differed from that of both pony and pony × donkey. These differences related to a higher relative abundance and diversity of taxa with known, or speculated, roles in plant material degradation. These findings are consistent with the previously reported increased fiber degradation in donkeys compared to ponies, and suggest that the hindgut microbiota plays a role. This offers novel opportunities for pony and pony × donkey to extract more energy from dietary fiber via microbial mediated strategies. This could potentially decrease the need for energy dense feeds which are a risk factor for gut-mediated disease.

Indexed as

Anaerobic fungiArchaeaBacteriaBarcoded amplicon sequencingDonkeyFecesHinnyMulePony

Identifiers

PMID33499942
PMCPMC7807894
OpenAlexW3029974175

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.