Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34807441›Full record

ReviewAdvances in experimental medicine and biology2022

Potential Replacements for Antibiotic Growth Promoters in Poultry: Interactions at the Gut Level and Their Impact on Host Immunity.

Christina L Swaggerty, Cristiano Bortoluzzi, Annah Lee, Cinthia Eyng, Gabriela Dal Pont, Michael H Kogut

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Advances in experimental medicine and biology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
7.9field-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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Benzoic Acid,Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025
    Article
  3. Impact ofVeterinary sciences · 2024
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
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 1 country.

Christina L SwaggertySouthern Plains Agricultural Research Center, USDA-ARS, College Station, TX, USA. christi.swaggerty@usda.gov.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5057-8175
Cristiano BortoluzziDepartment of Poultry Science, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, USA.
Annah LeeDepartment of Poultry Science, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, USA.
Cinthia EyngDepartment of Animal Science, Western Parana University, Marechal C. Rondon, PR, Brazil.
Gabriela Dal PontDepartment of Poultry Science, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, USA.
Michael H KogutSouthern Plains Agricultural Research Center, USDA-ARS, College Station, TX, USA. Mike.kogut@usda.gov.
Texas A&M University · USSouthern Plains Agricultural Research Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The chicken gastrointestinal tract (GIT) has a complex, biodiverse microbial community of ~ 9 million bacterial genes plus archaea and fungi that links the host diet to its health. This microbial population contributes to host physiology through metabolite signaling while also providing local and systemic nutrients to multiple organ systems. In a homeostatic state, the host-microbial interaction is symbiotic; however, physiological issues are associated with dysregulated microbiota. Manipulating the microbiota is a therapeutic option, and the concept of adding beneficial bacteria to the intestine has led to probiotic and prebiotic development. The gut microbiome is readily changeable by diet, antibiotics, pathogenic infections, and host- and environmental-dependent events. The intestine performs key roles of nutrient absorption, tolerance of beneficial microbiota, yet responding to undesirable microbes or microbial products and preventing translocation to sterile body compartments. During homeostasis, the immune system is actively preventing or modulating the response to known or innocuous antigens. Manipulating the microbiota through nutrition, modulating host immunity, preventing pathogen colonization, or improving intestinal barrier function has led to novel methods to prevent disease, but also resulted in improved body weight, feed conversion, and carcass yield in poultry. This review highlights the importance of adding different feed additives to the diets of poultry in order to manipulate and enhance health and productivity of flocks.

Indexed as

Gastrointestinal MicrobiomeProbioticsAnimalsAnti-Bacterial AgentsGastrointestinal TractPoultryPrebioticsAnti-Bacterial AgentsPrebioticsButyrateEnzymesIntestinal healthPhytobioticsPoultryPrebioticsProbiotics

Identifiers

PMID34807441
OpenAlexW3215647993

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.