Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35507858›Full record

ArticleAnimal bioscience2022

Impact of different shades of light-emitting diode on fecal microbiota and gut health in broiler chickens.

Andrea Ianni, Francesca Bennato, Veronica Di Gianvittorio, Marco Di Domenico, Camillo Martino, Martina Colapietro, Cesare Cammà, Giuseppe Martino

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Animal bioscience, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 53% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Andrea IanniFaculty of BioScience and Technology for Food, Agriculture and Environment, University of Teramo, Via Renato Balzarini 1, 64100 Teramo, Italy.
Francesca BennatoFaculty of BioScience and Technology for Food, Agriculture and Environment, University of Teramo, Via Renato Balzarini 1, 64100 Teramo, Italy.
Veronica Di GianvittorioFaculty of BioScience and Technology for Food, Agriculture and Environment, University of Teramo, Via Renato Balzarini 1, 64100 Teramo, Italy.
Marco Di DomenicoIstituto Zooprofilattico Sperimentale dell'Abruzzo e del Molise "G. Caporale", Via Campo Boario, 64100 Teramo (TE), Italy.
Camillo MartinoIstituto Zooprofilattico Sperimentale dell'Abruzzo e del Molise "G. Caporale", Via Campo Boario, 64100 Teramo (TE), Italy.
Martina ColapietroFaculty of BioScience and Technology for Food, Agriculture and Environment, University of Teramo, Via Renato Balzarini 1, 64100 Teramo, Italy.
Cesare CammàIstituto Zooprofilattico Sperimentale dell'Abruzzo e del Molise "G. Caporale", Via Campo Boario, 64100 Teramo (TE), Italy.
Giuseppe MartinoFaculty of BioScience and Technology for Food, Agriculture and Environment, University of Teramo, Via Renato Balzarini 1, 64100 Teramo, Italy.
University of Teramo · ITIstituto Zooprofilattico Sperimentale dell'Abruzzo e del Molise G. Caporale · IT

Funding

Rural Development Plan
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe aim of this study was to characterize the fecal microbiota of broiler chickens reared in the presence of different shades of light-emitting diode (LED) lights, correlating this information with biochemical and molecular evidence that allowed drawing conclusions on the state of health of the animals.

methodsOverall, the metagenomic approach on fecal samples was associated with evaluations on enzymes involved in the cellular response to oxidative stress: glutathione peroxidase (GPX), superoxide dismutase and catalase; while the inflammatory aspect was studied through the dosage of a proinflammatory cytokine, the interleukin 6 (IL-6), and the evaluation of the matrix metalloproteinases 2 (MMP-2) and 9 (MMP-9). Specifically, analysis was performed on distinct groups of chickens respectively raised in the presence of neutral (K = 3,300 to 3,700), cool (K = 5,500 to 6,000), and warm (K = 3,000 to 2,500) LED lightings, and a direct comparison was performed with animals reared with traditional neon lights.

resultsThe metagenomic analysis highlighted the presence of two most abundant bacterial phyla, the Firmicutes and the Bacteroidetes, with the latter characterized by a greater relative abundance (p<0.05) in the group of animals reared with Neutral LED light. The analysis on the enzymes involved in the antioxidant response showed an effect of the LED light, regardless of the applied shade, of reducing the expression of GPX (p<0.01), although this parameter is not correlated to an effective reduction in the tissue amount of the enzyme. Regarding the inflammatory state, no differences associated with IL-6 and MMP-9 were found; however, is noteworthy the significant reduction of MMP-2 activity in tissue samples obtained from animals subjected to illumination with neutral LED light.

conclusionThis evidence, combined with the metagenomic findings, supports a potential positive effect of neutral LED lighting on animal welfare, although these considerations must be reflected in more targeted biochemical evaluations.

Indexed as

Animal WelfareAntioxidant EnzymesChicken Gut MicrobiotaLight-emitting DiodeMatrix Metalloproteinases

Identifiers

PMID35507858
PMCPMC9659436
OpenAlexW4225124461

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.