Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33821466›Full record

ReviewProbiotics and antimicrobial proteins2021

Scope of Archaea in Fish Feed: a New Chapter in Aquafeed Probiotics?

Nisha Chuphal, Krishna Pada Singha, Parimal Sardar, Narottam Prasad Sahu, Naseemashahul Shamna, Vikas Kumar

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Probiotics and antimicrobial proteins, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 24% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Probiotic Effects ofAquaculture nutrition · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Dietary Inclusion ofAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2023
    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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Nisha Chuphal *Fish Nutrition, Biochemistry and Physiology Division, ICAR-Central Institute of Fisheries Education, Versova, Mumbai, 400 061, India.
Krishna Pada Singha *Fish Nutrition, Biochemistry and Physiology Division, ICAR-Central Institute of Fisheries Education, Versova, Mumbai, 400 061, India.
Parimal SardarFish Nutrition, Biochemistry and Physiology Division, ICAR-Central Institute of Fisheries Education, Versova, Mumbai, 400 061, India. parimalsardar@cife.edu.in.
Narottam Prasad SahuFish Nutrition, Biochemistry and Physiology Division, ICAR-Central Institute of Fisheries Education, Versova, Mumbai, 400 061, India.
Naseemashahul ShamnaFish Nutrition, Biochemistry and Physiology Division, ICAR-Central Institute of Fisheries Education, Versova, Mumbai, 400 061, India.
Vikas KumarAquaculture Research Institute, Department of Animal Veterinary and Food Sciences, University of Idaho, Moscow, ID, 83844-3020, USA. vikaskumar@uidaho.edu.
Central Institute of Fisheries Education · INUniversity of Idaho · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The outbreak of diseases leading to substantial loss is a major bottleneck in aquaculture. Over the last decades, the concept of using feed probiotics was more in focus to address the growth and health of cultivable aquatic organisms. The objective of this review is to provide an overview of the distinct functionality of archaea from conventional probiotics in nutrient utilization, specific caloric contribution, evading immune response and processing thermal resistance. The prime limitation of conventional probiotics is the viability of desired microbes under harsh feed processing conditions. To overcome the constraints of commercial probiotics pertaining to incompatibility towards industrial processing procedure, a super microbe, archaea, appears to be a potential alternative approach in aquaculture. The peculiarity of the archaeal cell wall provides them with heat stability and rigidity under industrial processing conditions. Besides, archaea being one of the gut microbial communities participates in various health-oriented biological functions in animals. Thus, the current review devoted that administration of archaea in aquafeed could be a promising strategy in aquaculture. Archaea may be used as a potential probiotic with the possible modes of functions and advantages over conventional probiotics in aquafeed preparation. The present review also provides the challenges associated with the use of archaea for aquaculture and a brief outline of the patents on archaea to highlight the various use of archaea in different sectors.

Indexed as

ArchaeaProbioticsAnimal FeedAquacultureAquafeedArchaeaGut-microbesProbiotics

Identifiers

PMID33821466
OpenAlexW3141134782

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.