Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34638730›Full record

ReviewInternational journal of molecular sciences2021

Butyric and Citric Acids and Their Salts in Poultry Nutrition: Effects on Gut Health and Intestinal Microbiota.

Mebratu Melaku, Ruqing Zhong, Hui Han, Fan Wan, Bao Yi, Hongfu Zhang

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in International journal of molecular sciences, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 42 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
42citing papers in PubMed
8.5field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

42 citing papers in PubMed, 88 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Effects ofAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Single or Combined Supplementation ofVeterinary sciences · 2025
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Impact ofVeterinary sciences · 2024
    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 1 institution in 2 countries.

Mebratu MelakuState Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition, Institute of Animal Science, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100193, China.ORCID 0000-0003-0732-2275
Ruqing ZhongState Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition, Institute of Animal Science, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100193, China.ORCID 0000-0003-0494-6699
Hui HanState Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition, Institute of Animal Science, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100193, China.
Fan WanState Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition, Institute of Animal Science, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100193, China.
Bao YiState Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition, Institute of Animal Science, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100193, China.ORCID 0000-0003-0295-3035
Hongfu ZhangState Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition, Institute of Animal Science, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100193, China.
Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences · CN

Funding

Central Public-interest Scientific Institution Basal Research Fund, Chinese Academy of Fishery Sciences Y2021GH01-4China Agriculture Research System CARS-41Major Scientific Research Tasks for Scientific and Technological Innovation Projects of the Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences CAAS-ZDRW202006-02National Key Research and Development Program of China 2016YFD0500501National Natural Science Foundation of China 31702119State Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition 2004DA125184G2102
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Intestinal dysfunction of farm animals, such as intestinal inflammation and altered gut microbiota, is the critical problem affecting animal welfare, performance and farm profitability. China has prohibited the use of antibiotics to improve feed efficiency and growth performance for farm animals, including poultry, in 2020. With the advantages of maintaining gut homeostasis, enhancing digestion, and absorption and modulating gut microbiota, organic acids are regarded as promising antibiotic alternatives. Butyric and citric acids as presentative organic acids positively impact growth performance, welfare, and intestinal health of livestock mainly by reducing pathogenic bacteria and maintaining the gastrointestinal tract (GIT) pH. This review summarizes the discovery of butyric acid (BA), citric acid (CA) and their salt forms, molecular structure and properties, metabolism, biological functions and their applications in poultry nutrition. The research findings about BA, CA and their salts on rats, pigs and humans are also briefly reviewed. Therefore, this review will fill the knowledge gaps of the scientific community and may be of great interest for poultry nutritionists, researchers and feed manufacturers about these two weak organic acids and their effects on intestinal health and gut microbiota community, with the hope of providing safe, healthy and nutrient-rich poultry products to consumers.

Indexed as

Animal FeedAnimalsButyric AcidCitric AcidGastrointestinal MicrobiomeIntestinal MucosaPoultryButyric AcidCitric Acidbutyric acid/saltcitric acid/saltgut healthintestinal microbiotapoultry nutrition

Identifiers

PMID34638730
PMCPMC8508690
OpenAlexW3203979121

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.