Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35965349›Full record

ArticleMicrobiome2022

Systematic profiling of the chicken gut microbiome reveals dietary supplementation with antibiotics alters expression of multiple microbial pathways with minimal impact on community structure.

Angela Zou, Kerry Nadeau, Xuejian Xiong, Pauline W Wang, Julia K Copeland, Jee Yeon Lee, James St Pierre, Maxine Ty, Billy Taj, John H Brumell and 4 more

Open access · goldAbstract readVideo-Audio Media
In one paragraph

Article in Microbiome, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed
5.6field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

35 citing papers in PubMed, 67 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Investigation of the Effect of TiOAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Amino Acid Nutrition in Poultry: A Review.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Frontiers in veterinary science · 2025
    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

14 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Angela Zou *Department of Biochemistry, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Kerry Nadeau *Department of Agricultural, Food and Nutritional Science, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada.
Xuejian Xiong *Program in Molecular Medicine, Hospital for Sick Children, Peter Gilgan Center for Research and Learning, 686 Bay Street, Toronto, ON, M5G 0A4, Canada.
Pauline W WangCentre for the Analysis of Genome Evolution & Function, University of Toronto, 25 Willcocks St, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Julia K CopelandCentre for the Analysis of Genome Evolution & Function, University of Toronto, 25 Willcocks St, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Jee Yeon LeeCentre for the Analysis of Genome Evolution & Function, University of Toronto, 25 Willcocks St, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
James St PierreProgram in Molecular Medicine, Hospital for Sick Children, Peter Gilgan Center for Research and Learning, 686 Bay Street, Toronto, ON, M5G 0A4, Canada.
Maxine TyDepartment of Biochemistry, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Billy TajProgram in Molecular Medicine, Hospital for Sick Children, Peter Gilgan Center for Research and Learning, 686 Bay Street, Toronto, ON, M5G 0A4, Canada.
John H BrumellDepartment of Molecular Genetics, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
David S GuttmanCentre for the Analysis of Genome Evolution & Function, University of Toronto, 25 Willcocks St, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Shayan SharifDepartment of Pathobiology, Ontario Veterinary College, University of Guelph, Guelph, ON, Canada.
Doug KorverDepartment of Agricultural, Food and Nutritional Science, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada.
John ParkinsonDepartment of Biochemistry, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada. jparkin@sickkids.ca.
University of Toronto · CAHospital for Sick Children · CAUniversity of Alberta · CAUniversity of Guelph · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe emergence of antimicrobial resistance is a major threat to global health and has placed pressure on the livestock industry to eliminate the use of antibiotic growth promotants (AGPs) as feed additives. To mitigate their removal, efficacious alternatives are required. AGPs are thought to operate through modulating the gut microbiome to limit opportunities for colonization by pathogens, increase nutrient utilization, and reduce inflammation. However, little is known concerning the underlying mechanisms. Previous studies investigating the effects of AGPs on the poultry gut microbiome have largely focused on 16S rDNA surveys based on a single gastrointestinal (GI) site, diet, and/or timepoint, resulting in an inconsistent view of their impact on community composition.

methodsIn this study, we perform a systematic investigation of both the composition and function of the chicken gut microbiome, in response to AGPs. Birds were raised under two different diets and AGP treatments, and 16S rDNA surveys applied to six GI sites sampled at three key timepoints of the poultry life cycle. Functional investigations were performed through metatranscriptomics analyses and metabolomics.

resultsOur study reveals a more nuanced view of the impact of AGPs, dependent on age of bird, diet, and intestinal site sampled. Although AGPs have a limited impact on taxonomic abundances, they do appear to redefine influential taxa that may promote the exclusion of other taxa. Microbiome expression profiles further reveal a complex landscape in both the expression and taxonomic representation of multiple pathways including cell wall biogenesis, antimicrobial resistance, and several involved in energy, amino acid, and nucleotide metabolism. Many AGP-induced changes in metabolic enzyme expression likely serve to redirect metabolic flux with the potential to regulate bacterial growth or produce metabolites that impact the host.

conclusionsAs alternative feed additives are developed to mimic the action of AGPs, our study highlights the need to ensure such alternatives result in functional changes that are consistent with site-, age-, and diet-associated taxa. The genes and pathways identified in this study are therefore expected to drive future studies, applying tools such as community-based metabolic modeling, focusing on the mechanistic impact of different dietary regimes on the microbiome. Consequently, the data generated in this study will be crucial for the development of next-generation feed additives targeting gut health and poultry production. Video Abstract.

Indexed as

Gastrointestinal MicrobiomeAnimalsAnti-Bacterial AgentsChickensDietary SupplementsDNA, RibosomalAnti-Bacterial AgentsDNA, Ribosomal

Identifiers

PMID35965349
PMCPMC9377095
OpenAlexW4291413831

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.