ArticleMicroorganisms2022
Evaluation of Selected Bacteria and Yeast for Probiotic Potential in Poultry Production.
Article in Microorganisms, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Probiotic potential of Companilactobacillus alimentarius Y4 in alleviating ciprofloxacin-resistant Salmonella-induced intestinal inflammation through microbiota-metabolite modulation.BMC microbiology · 2026Article
- Probiotics in Poultry: Unlocking Productivity Through Microbiome Modulation and Gut Health.Microorganisms · 2025Review
- Article
- Probiotic applications of bifidobacteria in poultry: administration methods and microencapsulation techniques.Microbiome research reports · 2025Review
- Optimizing Poultry Nutrition to CombatMicroorganisms · 2024Review
- Gut Microbiome Analysis and Screening of Lactic Acid Bacteria with Probiotic Potential in Anhui Swine.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Performance and efficiency of feed utilization in poultry is highly influenced by gut health, which is dependent on intestinal microbial balance. Probiotics are live microbial feed supplements or viable microorganisms that beneficially affect the host animal by improving its gastrointestinal tract (GIT) microbial balance. However, their mode of action and suitable GIT environment favoring their colonization of the GIT is obscure. The probiotic properties of Lactobacillus plantarum, Bifidobacterium longum, and Saccharomyces boulardii were evaluated. These microbes were tested in vitro against gastrointestinal conditions for survivability and their ability to attach to the intestinal mucosa. The ability of the microbes to tolerate and survive varying pH levels and bile concentrations was assessed. The microbes were challenged with a pH of 2 to 7 for 5 h and bile concentrations of 1 to 3% for 6 hrs. The microbes were sampled hourly to evaluate growth or decline in colony-forming units (CFU). B. longum, L. Plantarum, and S. boulardii exhibited significantly higher CFU (p < 0.05) at a pH range of 5 to 7, 4 to 7, and 2 to 7, respectively, when compared with other pH levels. L. plantarum had much higher colony-forming units per mL within each pH level, except at pH 2 where S. boulardii was the only microbe to survive over time. While L. plantarum and S. boulardii were able to tolerate the various bile concentrations, B. longum and L. plantarum showed remarkable ability to attach to the intestinal mucosa and to inhibit pathogenic microbes.
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.