Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36009603›Full record

ArticleAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2022

Host Species Affects Bacterial Evenness, but Not Diversity: Comparison of Fecal Bacteria of Cows and Goats Offered the Same Diet.

Tiziana Maria Mahayri, Kateřina Olša Fliegerová, Silvana Mattiello, Stefania Celozzi, Jakub Mrázek, Chahrazed Mekadim, Hana Sechovcová, Simona Kvasnová, Elie Atallah, Giuseppe Moniello

Open access · goldAbstract 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 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Verification of the Utility of the StandardizedAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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

10 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Tiziana Maria MahayriLaboratory of Anaerobic Microbiology, Institute of Animal Physiology and Genetics, Czech Academy of Science, 14220 Prague, Czech Republic.ORCID 0000-0001-5975-2272
Kateřina Olša FliegerováLaboratory of Anaerobic Microbiology, Institute of Animal Physiology and Genetics, Czech Academy of Science, 14220 Prague, Czech Republic.ORCID 0000-0001-9439-8168
Silvana MattielloDepartment of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences-Production, Landscape, Agroenergy, University of Milan, 20133 Milan, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-1885-949X
Stefania CelozziDepartment of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences-Production, Landscape, Agroenergy, University of Milan, 20133 Milan, Italy.
Jakub MrázekLaboratory of Anaerobic Microbiology, Institute of Animal Physiology and Genetics, Czech Academy of Science, 14220 Prague, Czech Republic.ORCID 0000-0003-1907-3333
Chahrazed MekadimLaboratory of Anaerobic Microbiology, Institute of Animal Physiology and Genetics, Czech Academy of Science, 14220 Prague, Czech Republic.ORCID 0000-0002-5793-3501
Hana SechovcováLaboratory of Anaerobic Microbiology, Institute of Animal Physiology and Genetics, Czech Academy of Science, 14220 Prague, Czech Republic.
Simona KvasnováLaboratory of Anaerobic Microbiology, Institute of Animal Physiology and Genetics, Czech Academy of Science, 14220 Prague, Czech Republic.
Elie AtallahDepartment of Veterinary Medicine, University of Sassari, 07100 Sassari, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-1892-7803
Giuseppe MonielloDepartment of Veterinary Medicine, University of Sassari, 07100 Sassari, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-2593-7102
Czech Academy of Sciences, Institute of Animal Physiology and Genetics · CZUniversity of Sassari · ITUniversity of Milan · ITCzech University of Life Sciences Prague · CZ

Funding

Fondazione di Sardegna FDS2223MONIELLO - CUP J83C22000160
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The aim of this study was to compare the diversity and composition of fecal bacteria in goats and cows offered the same diet and to evaluate the influence of animal species on the gut microbiome. A total of 17 female goats (Blond Adamellan) and 16 female cows (Brown Swiss) kept on an organic farm were fed pasture and hay. Bacterial structure in feces was examined by high-throughput sequencing using the V4-V5 region of the 16S rRNA gene. The Alpha diversity measurements of the bacterial community showed no statistical differences in species richness and diversity between the two groups of ruminants. However, the Pielou evenness index revealed a significant difference and showed higher species evenness in cows compared to goats. Beta diversity measurements showed statistical dissimilarities and significant clustering of bacterial composition between goats and cows. Firmicutes were the dominant phylum in both goats and cows, followed by Bacteroidetes, Proteobacteria, and Spirochaetes. Linear discriminant analysis with effect size (LEfSe) showed a total of 36 significantly different taxa between goats and cows. Notably, the relative abundance of

Indexed as

bacterial communitybacterial diversitycowsdietfecal bacteriagoatshigh-throughput sequencingruminant species

Identifiers

PMID36009603
PMCPMC9404439
OpenAlexW4292466529

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.