Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33767196›Full record

ArticleNPJ biofilms and microbiomes2021

No hints at glyphosate-induced ruminal dysbiosis in cows.

Fabian Billenkamp, Karina Schnabel, Liane Hüther, Jana Frahm, Dirk von Soosten, Ulrich Meyer, Dirk Höper, Martin Beer, Christian Seyboldt, Heinrich Neubauer and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in NPJ biofilms and microbiomes, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 34% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Impact of glyphosate (RoundupGut microbes · 2023
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Traditional and emergingAnimal nutrition (Zhongguo xu mu shou yi xue hui) · 2023
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

11 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Fabian BillenkampInstitute of Animal Nutrition, Federal Research Institute for Animal Health, Friedrich-Loeffler-Institute, Brunswick, Germany. fabian.billenkamp@fli.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5415-7669
Karina SchnabelInstitute of Animal Nutrition, Federal Research Institute for Animal Health, Friedrich-Loeffler-Institute, Brunswick, Germany.
Liane HütherInstitute of Animal Nutrition, Federal Research Institute for Animal Health, Friedrich-Loeffler-Institute, Brunswick, Germany.
Jana FrahmInstitute of Animal Nutrition, Federal Research Institute for Animal Health, Friedrich-Loeffler-Institute, Brunswick, Germany.
Dirk von SoostenInstitute of Animal Nutrition, Federal Research Institute for Animal Health, Friedrich-Loeffler-Institute, Brunswick, Germany.
Ulrich MeyerInstitute of Animal Nutrition, Federal Research Institute for Animal Health, Friedrich-Loeffler-Institute, Brunswick, Germany.
Dirk HöperInstitute of Diagnostic Virology, Federal Research Institute for Animal Health, Friedrich-Loeffler-Institute, Greifswald-Riems, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8408-2274
Martin BeerInstitute of Diagnostic Virology, Federal Research Institute for Animal Health, Friedrich-Loeffler-Institute, Greifswald-Riems, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0598-5254
Christian SeyboldtInstitute of Bacterial Infections and Zoonoses, Federal Research Institute for Animal Health, Friedrich-Loeffler-Institute, Jena, Germany.
Heinrich NeubauerInstitute of Bacterial Infections and Zoonoses, Federal Research Institute for Animal Health, Friedrich-Loeffler-Institute, Jena, Germany.
Sven DänickeInstitute of Animal Nutrition, Federal Research Institute for Animal Health, Friedrich-Loeffler-Institute, Brunswick, Germany.
Friedrich-Loeffler-Institut · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Glyphosate-based herbicides are among the most used non-selective herbicides worldwide and inhibit synthesis of aromatic amino acids in plants, bacteria, and fungi. Given the broad usage, controversies concerning potential effects of glyphosate on health and especially on gut microbiomes arose. For cattle, it has been proposed based on in vitro data that glyphosate has detrimental effects on the ruminal microbiome, which manifest as a specific inhibition of bacteria involved in fiber degradation and as an enrichment of specific pathogens. In the present study, glyphosate effects on the ruminal microbiome were analyzed in vivo using glyphosate contaminated feedstuffs with strong differences in dietary fiber and dietary energy content in order to reproduce the proposed detrimental glyphosate effects on the rumen microbiome. While significant impact of dietary factors on the ruminal microbiome and its products are pointed out, no adverse glyphosate effects on ruminal microbiome composition, diversity, and microbial metabolites are observed.

Indexed as

Animal FeedAnimalsBacteriaCattleDietary FiberDNA, BacterialDNA, RibosomalDysbiosisFemaleFermentationGastrointestinal MicrobiomeGlycineGlyphosateHerbicidesPhylogenyRNA, Ribosomal, 16SDietary FiberDNA, BacterialDNA, RibosomalGlycineGlyphosateHerbicidesRNA, Ribosomal, 16S

Identifiers

PMID33767196
PMCPMC7994389
OpenAlexW3137862081

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.