Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35501888›Full record

ArticleJournal of animal science and biotechnology2022

Starchy and fibrous feedstuffs differ in their in vitro digestibility and fermentation characteristics and differently modulate gut microbiota of swine.

Utsav P Tiwari, Rabindra K Mandal, Kabi Raj Neupane, Birendra Mishra, Rajesh Jha

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of animal science and biotechnology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Journal of advanced veterinary and animal research · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Effects ofFrontiers in veterinary science · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Frontiers in veterinary science · 2023
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Evaluation ofFrontiers in veterinary science · 2022
    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

5 authors.

Utsav P TiwariDepartment of Human Nutrition, Food and Animal Sciences, University of Hawaii at Manoa, 1955 East-West Rd, Honolulu, HI, 96822, USA.
Rabindra K MandalIndiana University School of Medicine, Indiana, USA.
Kabi Raj NeupaneMath and Sciences Division, Leeward community college, Pearl City, HI, 96782, USA.
Birendra MishraDepartment of Human Nutrition, Food and Animal Sciences, University of Hawaii at Manoa, 1955 East-West Rd, Honolulu, HI, 96822, USA.
Rajesh JhaDepartment of Human Nutrition, Food and Animal Sciences, University of Hawaii at Manoa, 1955 East-West Rd, Honolulu, HI, 96822, USA. rjha@hawaii.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2891-8353

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAlternative feedstuffs may contribute to reducing feed costs of pig production. But these feedstuffs are typically rich in fiber and resistant starch (RS). Dietary fibers and RS are fermented in the gastrointestinal tract (GIT) and modulate the microbial community. Certain microbes in the GIT can promote host health, depending on the type of fermentation substrates available. In this study, six alternative feedstuffs (three starchy: Okinawan sweet potato, OSP; yam, and taro, and three fibrous: wheat millrun, WMR; barley brewers grain, BBG; and macadamia nut cake, MNC) were evaluated for their in vitro digestibility and fermentation characteristics and their effects on pig's hindgut microbial profile. After 2 steps of enzymatic digestion assay, residues were fermented using fresh pig feces as microbial inoculum, and gas production was recorded periodically for 72 h and modeled for fermentation kinetics. After fermentation, the residual liquid phase was analyzed for short-chain fatty acid (SCFA), and the solid phase was used to determine the nutrient's digestibility and microbial community.

resultsIn vitro ileal digestibility of dry matter and gross energy was higher in starchy than fibrous feedstuffs. Total gas and SCFA production were significantly higher (P < 0.001) in starchy feedstuffs than fibrous feedstuffs. Both acetate and propionate production was significantly higher (P < 0.001) in all starchy feedstuffs than BBG and MNC; WMR was in between. Overall alpha diversity was not significantly different within and between starchy and fibrous feedstuffs. Beta diversity (measured using bray Curtis dissimilarity distance) of starchy feedstuffs was significantly different (P < 0.005) than fibrous feedstuffs.

conclusionStarchy feedstuffs acted as a substrate to similar types of microbes, whereas fibrous feedstuffs resulted in a more diverse microbial population. Such alternative feedstuffs may exert comparable beneficial effects, thus may be included in swine diets to improve gut health.

Indexed as

FermentationFiberGut healthMicrobial diversityStarchSwine

Identifiers

PMID35501888
PMCPMC9063073

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.