Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35953238›Full record

ArticleJournal of animal science2022

Cecal microbiota of feedlot cattle fed a four-species Bacillus supplement.

Luke K Fuerniss, Kelly K Kreikemeier, Lynn D Reed, Matt D Cravey, Bradley J Johnson

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of animal science, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 21% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Effects ofTranslational animal science · 2026
    Article
  3. Effects of aAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. In Vitro Investigation of the Effects ofAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Complete genome analysis ofFrontiers in microbiology · 2023
    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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Luke K FuernissDepartment of Animal and Food Sciences, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX 79409, USA.
Kelly K KreikemeierPioneer Feedyard, Foote Cattle Company, Oakley, KS 67748, USA.
Lynn D ReedPhileo by Lesaffre, Milwaukee, WI 52404, USA.
Matt D CraveyPhileo by Lesaffre, Milwaukee, WI 52404, USA.
Bradley J JohnsonDepartment of Animal and Food Sciences, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX 79409, USA.
Texas Tech University · USPioneer (United States) · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

As commercial fed cattle consume large amounts of concentrate feedstuffs, hindgut health can be challenged. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effects of a commercially available Bacillus feed additive on cattle health outcomes and cecal microbiota of fed cattle at the time of harvest. Commercial cattle from a single feedlot were identified for characterization of cecal microbial communities using 16S ribosomal ribonucleic acid gene sequencing. All cattle were fed a common corn-based finishing diet. Control cattle (CON) were administered no treatment while treated cattle (TRT) were supplemented daily with 0.050 g of MicroSaf 4C 40 (2 billion colony forming units of Bacillus spp.; Phileo by Lesaffre, Milwaukee, WI). Immediately after harvest and evisceration, the cecal contents of cattle were sampled. After DNA extraction, amplification, and sequencing, reads from CON samples (N = 12) and TRT samples (N = 12) were assigned taxonomy using the SILVA 138 database. Total morbidity, first treatment of atypical interstitial pneumonia, and early shipments for harvest were decreased among TRT cattle compared to CON cattle (P ≤ 0.021). On average, cecal microbiota from TRT cattle had greater alpha diversity than microbiota from CON cattle as measured by Shannon diversity, Pielou's evenness, and feature richness (P < 0.010). Additionally, TRT microbial communities were different (P = 0.001) and less variable (P < 0.001) than CON microbial communities when evaluated by unweighted UniFrac distances. By relative abundance across all samples, the most prevalent phyla were Firmicutes (55.40%, SD = 15.97) and Bacteroidetes (28.17%, SD = 17.74) followed by Proteobacteria (6.75%, SD = 10.98), Spirochaetes (4.54%, SD = 4.85), and Euryarchaeota (1.77%, SD = 3.00). Spirochaetes relative abundance in TRT communities was greater than that in CON communities and was differentially abundant between treatments by ANCOM testing (W = 11); Monoglobaceae was the only family-level taxon identified as differentially abundant (W = 59; greater mean relative abundance in TRT group by 2.12 percentage points). Half (N = 6) of the CON samples clustered away from all other samples based on principal coordinates and represented cecal dysbiosis among CON cattle. The results of this study indicated that administering a four-species blend of Bacillus positively supported the cecal microbial communities of finishing cattle. Further research is needed to explore potential mechanisms of action of Bacillus DFM products in feedlot cattle.

Indexed as

BacillusMicrobiotaAnimal FeedAnimalsBacteriaCattleDietDNARNA, Ribosomal, 16SDNARNA, Ribosomal, 16S16S ribosomal ribonucleic acidBacilluscecumfeedlot

Identifiers

PMID35953238
PMCPMC9576023
OpenAlexW4291011695

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.