Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34398927›Full record

ArticlePloS one2021

Characterization of the fecal microbiota of sows and their offspring from German commercial pig farms.

Anja Lührmann, Ksenia Ovadenko, Justinus Hellmich, Christoph Sudendey, Vitaly Belik, Jürgen Zentek, Wilfried Vahjen

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 22% 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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. MaternalComputational and structural biotechnology journal · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Factors Affecting Gut Microbiota of Puppies from Birth to Weaning.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2023
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Anja LührmannDepartment of Veterinary Medicine, Institute of Animal Nutrition, Freie Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-3139-0705
Ksenia OvadenkoDepartment of Veterinary Medicine, System Modeling Group, Institute of Veterinary Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Freie Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Justinus HellmichDepartment of Veterinary Medicine, Institute of Animal Nutrition, Freie Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Christoph SudendeyDepartment of Veterinary Medicine, Institute of Animal Nutrition, Freie Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Vitaly BelikDepartment of Veterinary Medicine, System Modeling Group, Institute of Veterinary Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Freie Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-3748-0071
Jürgen ZentekDepartment of Veterinary Medicine, Institute of Animal Nutrition, Freie Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Wilfried VahjenDepartment of Veterinary Medicine, Institute of Animal Nutrition, Freie Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Freie Universität Berlin · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Strategies to combat microbiota-associated health problems are of high interest in pig production. Successful intervention strategies with beneficial long-term effects are still missing. Most studies on pig microbiota have been conducted under standardized experimental conditions, but the situation in commercial farms differs dramatically. This study describes the fecal microbiota in German commercial pig farms under practical conditions. The study is part of the larger project "Optibiom" that aims to use bacterial composition and farm metadata to formulate tailor-made solutions for farm-specific health maintenance strategies. Special consideration is given to the sow-piglet relationship. Fecal samples from sows and their piglets were collected at two time points each in 20 different farms (sows ante- and postpartum and piglets before and after weaning). The extracted DNA was sequenced with Illumina 16S rDNA sequencing. For data analysis and visualization, differential abundance analyses, as well as hierarchical clustering and nonmetric multidimensional scaling (NMDS) were performed. A new "family unit" was implemented to compare farms based on the association between the microbiota in sows and their offspring. There are distinct changes in the microbial communities in sows before and after birth as well as in suckling and post-weaning piglets. The suckling pig microbiota is particularly different from all other groups and shows a lower bacterial diversity. While dominant genera in antepartum sows further displace the abundance of non-dominant genera postpartum, the opposite was true for piglets, where non-dominant bacteria in the suckling phase became dominant after weaning. The family unit for sows and their piglets led to separate cluster formation for some farms. The results indicate that the sow-piglet relationship is one driving force for the observed differences of the pig farms. The next step in the analysis will be the combination of metadata (feeding, housing and management practices) to find farm-specific differences that can be exploited to formulate a farm-specific health maintenance strategy.

Indexed as

MicrobiotaWeaningAnimalsAnimals, NewbornBacteriaFarmsFecesFemaleGermanyLactationSwine

Identifiers

PMID34398927
PMCPMC8367078
OpenAlexW3195999646

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.