Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34209794›Full record

ReviewAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2021

A Review of the Effects and Production of Spore-Forming Probiotics for Poultry.

Igor V Popov, Ammar Algburi, Evgeniya V Prazdnova, Maria S Mazanko, Vladimir Elisashvili, Anzhelica B Bren, Vladimir A Chistyakov, Elizaveta V Tkacheva, Vladimir I Trukhachev, Irina M Donnik and 5 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

29 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. MitigatingMicroorganisms · 2026
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Winning the battle of intestinal peace withFrontiers in microbiology · 2025
    Review
  15. Genomic Characterization ofMicroorganisms · 2024
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. HumanCurrent research in food science · 2024
    Article
  20. 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

15 authors.

Igor V PopovAgrobiotechnology Center, Don State Technical University, 344000 Rostov-on-Don, Russia.ORCID 0000-0002-9223-8731
Ammar AlgburiDepartment of Food Science, Rutgers State University, New Brunswick, NJ 08901, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-2073-7128
Evgeniya V PrazdnovaAgrobiotechnology Center, Don State Technical University, 344000 Rostov-on-Don, Russia.
Maria S MazankoAgrobiotechnology Center, Don State Technical University, 344000 Rostov-on-Don, Russia.
Vladimir ElisashviliInstitute of Microbial Biotechnology, Agricultural University of Georgia, 0131 Tbilisi, Georgia.ORCID 0000-0003-0856-6589
Anzhelica B BrenAgrobiotechnology Center, Don State Technical University, 344000 Rostov-on-Don, Russia.
Vladimir A ChistyakovAgrobiotechnology Center, Don State Technical University, 344000 Rostov-on-Don, Russia.
Elizaveta V TkachevaAgrobiotechnology Center, Don State Technical University, 344000 Rostov-on-Don, Russia.
Vladimir I TrukhachevMoscow Timiryazev Agricultural Academy, Russian State Agrarian University, 127550 Moscow, Russia.
Irina M DonnikRussian Academy of Sciences, 119991 Moscow, Russia.
Yuri A IvanovFGBNY Federal Research Engineering Center VIM, 109428 Moscow, Russia.
Dmitry RudoyAgrobiotechnology Center, Don State Technical University, 344000 Rostov-on-Don, Russia.
Alexey M ErmakovAgrobiotechnology Center, Don State Technical University, 344000 Rostov-on-Don, Russia.
Richard M WeeksHealth Promoting Naturals Laboratory, School of Environmental and Biological Sciences, Rutgers State University, New Brunswick, NJ 08901, USA.
Michael L ChikindasAgrobiotechnology Center, Don State Technical University, 344000 Rostov-on-Don, Russia.ORCID 0000-0001-7265-4562

Funding

Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation 075-15-2019-1880Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation 0852-2020-0029
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

One of the main problems in the poultry industry is the search for a viable replacement for antibiotic growth promoters. This issue requires a "one health" approach because the uncontrolled use of antibiotics in poultry can lead to the development of antimicrobial resistance, which is a concern not only in animals, but for humans as well. One of the promising ways to overcome this challenge is found in probiotics due to their wide range of features and mechanisms of action for health promotion. Moreover, spore-forming probiotics are suitable for use in the poultry industry because of their unique ability, encapsulation, granting them protection from the harshest conditions and resulting in improved availability for hosts' organisms. This review summarizes the information on gastrointestinal tract microbiota of poultry and their interaction with commensal and probiotic spore-forming bacteria. One of the most important topics of this review is the absence of uniformity in spore-forming probiotic trials in poultry. In our opinion, this problem can be solved by the creation of standards and checklists for these kinds of trials such as those used for pre-clinical and clinical trials in human medicine. Last but not least, this review covers problems and challenges related to spore-forming probiotic manufacturing.

Indexed as

antibioticsBacillusgrowth performancepoultrysolid-state fermentationspore-forming probiotics

Identifiers

PMID34209794
PMCPMC8300232

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.