ArticlePeerJ2021
A cross-sectional study of the nasal and fecal microbiota of sows from different health status within six commercial swine farms.
Article in PeerJ, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- The developing pig respiratory microbiome harbors strains antagonistic to common respiratory pathogens.mSystems · 2024Article
- Impact of Raised without Antibiotics Measures on Antimicrobial Resistance and Prevalence of Pathogens in Sow Barns.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Comparison of Productivity and Fecal Microbiotas of Sows in Commercial Farms.Microorganisms · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCull sows are a unique population on swine farms, often representing poor producing or compromised animals, and even though recent studies have reported that the microbiome is associated with susceptibility to diseases, the microbiome of the cull sow population has not been explored. The main objective of this study was to investigate whether there were differences in fecal and upper respiratory tract microbiota composition for groups of sows of different health status (healthy, cull, and compromised/ clinical sows) and from different farms (1 to 6).
methodsSix swine farms were visited once. Thirty individual fecal samples and nasal swabs were obtained at each farm and pooled by five across health status and farm. Samples underwent 16S rRNA gene amplicon sequencing and nasal and fecal microbiota were analyzed using QIIME2 v.2021.4.
resultsOverall, the diversity of the nasal microbiota was lower than the fecal microbiota ( DISCUSSION: This study provided baseline information for nasal and fecal microbiota of sows under field conditions, and results suggest that farm of origin can affect microbial diversity and composition. Furthermore, sow's health status may have an impact on the nasal microbiota composition.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.