Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35565537›Full record

ArticleAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2022

The Effects of

Rebekah L McMurray, M Elizabeth E Ball, Mark Linton, Laurette Pinkerton, Carmel Kelly, Jonathan Lester, Caroline Donaldson, Igori Balta, Michael M Tunney, Nicolae Corcionivoschi and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. 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

11 authors.

Rebekah L McMurraySchool of Biological Sciences, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast BT9 5DL, UK.
M Elizabeth E BallLivestock Production Sciences Branch, Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute, Hillsborough BT26 6DR, UK.
Mark LintonBacteriology Branch Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute, Belfast BT9 5PX, UK.
Laurette PinkertonBacteriology Branch Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute, Belfast BT9 5PX, UK.
Carmel KellyBacteriology Branch Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute, Belfast BT9 5PX, UK.
Jonathan LesterDevenish Nutrition, Belfast BT1 3BG, UK.
Caroline DonaldsonDevenish Nutrition, Belfast BT1 3BG, UK.
Igori BaltaBacteriology Branch Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute, Belfast BT9 5PX, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-1171-2623
Michael M TunneySchool of Pharmacy, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast BT9 7BL, UK.
Nicolae CorcionivoschiBacteriology Branch Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute, Belfast BT9 5PX, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-3011-3108
Chen SituInstitute for Global Food Security, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast BT9 5DL, UK.

Funding

Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs for Northern Ireland 123
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Poultry farming is growing globally, particularly in developing countries, to meet the demands of growing populations for poultry meat and eggs. This is likely to lead to an increase in the use of antibiotics in poultry feed, thus contributing to the development and spread of antibiotic resistance which, poses a serious threat to human and animal health worldwide. One way of reducing this threat is to reduce the use of antibiotics in poultry production by finding effective and sustainable antibiotic alternatives that can be used to support poultry health and productivity. Therefore, this study evaluates the incorporation of three medicinal plants, Anemone chinensis Bunge, Smilax glabra Roxb, and Agrimonia pilosa Ledeb, in poultry feed on production performance, nutrient digestibility, and bacteria in the chicken caecum in a 35-day performance trial with 420-day-old male Ross 308 broilers. Groups of randomly selected chicks received one of six dietary treatments. These included five experimental diets of reduced nutrient specifications as a negative control (NC); with amoxicillin as a positive antibiotic control (PC1); with A. pilosa Ledeb (NC1); with A. chinensis Bunge (NC2); and with S. glabra Roxb (NC3). One other positive control diet contained the recommended nutrient specification (PC2). Weight gain and feed intake were measured weekly and used to calculate the feed conversion ratio as performance parameters. Bacteria were enumerated from chicken caecum using a traditional plating method and selective agar. S. glabra Roxb and A. chinensis Bunge showed comparable effects to amoxicillin with significantly increased weight gain in birds offered these diets, compared to those offered the negative control from days 0 to 35 (p < 0.001). S. glabra Roxb exhibited effects similar to the amoxicillin control group with an improved feed conversion ratio (p < 0.001). In addition, S. glabra Roxb decreased numbers of E. coli and Campylobacter spp. on days 21 (p < 0.05) and 35 (p < 0.01) and increased numbers of lactic acid bacteria comparable to the antibiotic group on days 14 (p < 0.001) and 35 (p < 0.01). The findings of this in vivo trial highlight the potential of S. glabra Roxb and A. chinensis Bunge as beneficial feed material to promote poultry health and productivity in the absence of antibiotics.

Indexed as

Agrimonia pilosa Ledeband Smilax glabra RoxbAnemone chinensis Bungebroiler chickenslactic acid bacteriaperformanceplants

Identifiers

PMID35565537
PMCPMC9105906

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.