Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35909674›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in veterinary science2022

An Outdoor Access Period Improves Chicken Cecal Microbiota and Potentially Increases Micronutrient Biosynthesis.

Lorena Varriale, Lorena Coretti, Ludovico Dipineto, Brian D Green, Antonino Pace, Francesca Lembo, Lucia Francesca Menna, Alessandro Fioretti, Luca Borrelli

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in veterinary science, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 29% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Biosynthesis and function of 7-deazaguanine derivatives in bacteria and phages.Microbiology and molecular biology reviews : MMBR · 2024
    Review
  6. Article
  7. 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

9 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Lorena VarrialeDepartment of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Productions, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy.
Lorena CorettiDepartment of Pharmacy, School of Medicine and Surgery, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy.
Ludovico DipinetoDepartment of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Productions, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy.
Brian D GreenThe Institute for Global Food Security, Faculty of Medicine, Health and Life Sciences, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, United Kingdom.
Antonino PaceDepartment of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Productions, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy.
Francesca LemboDepartment of Pharmacy, School of Medicine and Surgery, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy.
Lucia Francesca MennaDepartment of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Productions, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy.
Alessandro FiorettiDepartment of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Productions, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy.
Luca BorrelliDepartment of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Productions, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy.
University of Naples Federico II · ITQueen's University Belfast · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Characterizing the gut microbiota of free-range and alternative poultry production systems provides information, which can be used to improve poultry welfare, performance, and environmental sustainability. Gut microbiota influence not only the health and metabolism of the host but also the presence of zoonotic agents contaminating food of animal origin. In this study, the composition and diversity of the cecal microbiota community of free-range grown chickens were characterized by 16S rDNA high-throughput Illumina sequencing. Significant differences were observed in the composition of chicken cecal microbiota at the time points of 28 days of age (Indoor group) and 56 days of age (Outdoor group), i.e., before and after the outdoor access period of chicken groups. The Outdoor group showed a richer and more complex microbial community, characterized by the onset of new phyla such as Deferribacterota and Synergistota, while the Indoor group showed an increase in Campylobacterota. At the species level, it is noteworthy that the occurrence of

Indexed as

caecal microbiotaenvironmental sustainabilityfree-range chickensgut microbiome predictionmutual exclusionzoonotic potential

Identifiers

PMID35909674
PMCPMC9330014
OpenAlexW4285389337

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.