ArticleBMC microbiology2022
Effects of floor- and net-rearing systems on intestinal growth and microbial diversity in the ceca of ducks.
Article in BMC microbiology, 2022. 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.
- Respiratory microbiota maturation enables machine learning based age prediction in chickens.BMC microbiology · 2026Article
- Effects of Polyvinyl Chloride (PVC) Microplastic Particles on Gut Microbiota Composition and Health Status in Rabbit Livestock.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Article
- Effects of rearing systems (cage versus floor) on the microbial composition and transcriptome of goose ileum.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRearing systems can affect livestock production directly, but whether they have effects on intestinal growth states and ceca microorganisms in ducks is largely unclear. The current study used Nonghua ducks to estimate the effects of rearing systems on the intestines by evaluating differences in intestinal growth indices and cecal microorganisms between ducks in the floor-rearing system (FRS) and net-rearing system (NRS).
resultsThe values of relative weight (RW), relative length (RL) and RW/RL of the duodenum, jejunum, ileum and ceca in the FRS were significantly higher than those in the NRS during weeks 4, 8 and 13 (p < 0.05). A total of 157 genera were identified from ducks under the two systems, and the dominant microorganisms in both treatments were Firmicutes, Bacteroidetes, Actinobacteria and Proteobacteria at the phylum level. The distribution of microorganisms in the ceca of the two treatments showed significant separation during the three time periods, and the value of the Simpson index in the FRS was significantly higher than that in the NRS at 13 weeks (p < 0.05). Five differential microorganisms and 25 differential metabolic pathways were found in the ceca at week 4, seven differential microorganisms and 25 differential metabolic pathways were found in the ceca at week 8, and four differential microorganisms and two differential metabolic pathways were found in the ceca at week 13.
conclusionsThe rearing system influences duck intestinal development and microorganisms. The FRS group had higher intestinal RL, RW and RW/RL and obviously separated ceca microorganisms compared to those of the NRS group. The differential metabolic pathways of cecal microorganisms decreased with increasing age, and the abundance of translation pathways was higher in the NRS group at week 13, while cofactor and vitamin metabolism were more abundant in the FRS group.
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.