Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36538559›Full record

ArticlePloS one2022

The microbiome shifts throughout the gastrointestinal tract of Bradford cattle in the Pampa biome.

Anderson Santos de Freitas, Flávia Caroline Gan, Diego Bittencourt de David, Luiz Fernando Wurdig Roesch

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. 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

4 authors.

Anderson Santos de FreitasCentro de Energia Nuclear na Agricultura, Universidade de São Paulo, Piracicaba, São Paulo, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-7726-0180
Flávia Caroline GanCentro Interdisciplinar de Pesquisas em Biotecnologia-CIP-Biotec, Campus São Gabriel, Universidade Federal do Pampa, São Gabriel, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil.
Diego Bittencourt de DavidDepartamento de Diagnóstico e Pesquisa Agropecuária-DDPA, Secretaria Estadual da Agricultura, Pecuária e Desenvolvimento Rural-SEADPR/RS, São Gabriel, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil.
Luiz Fernando Wurdig RoeschDepartment of Microbiology and Cell Science, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-1450-8828

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A deep understanding of the cattle gastrointestinal microbiome is crucial to selective breeding high-efficiency animals that produce more and generate less environmental damage. Here we performed the taxonomic identification of Bacterial and Archaeal communities using high throughput 16SrRNA gene sequencing from critical compartments of the gastrointestinal tract of Bradford cattle raised in a natural grassland in the Pampa biome, Brazil. We analyzed 110 samples, including saliva, ruminal fluid, and feces from 36 months old Bradford heifers (weighing on average 343 ± 30 kg by the sampling time). To reduce unexpected variation and confounders, we selected the animals from the same breed, submitted them to the same food source, and collected the samples for three consecutive years from different animals in the same season. Our main goal was to analyze the microbial shifts throughout the gastrointestinal tract to reference future works proposing management strategies and interventions to improve animal nutrition and increase production in the Pampa Biome. To accomplish our objective, we accessed the microbial community differences in groups with a high and low weight gain controlling for food ingestion and quality of grazed pasture. Few taxa were shared among the samples. About 40% of the phyla and 60% of the genera were unique from saliva samples, and 12.4% of the microbial genera were uniquely found in feces. All samples shared only 36.1% of phyla and 7.5% of genera. Differences in microbial diversity and taxa counts were observed. The ruminal fluid presented the lowest microbial richness, while saliva and feces presented the highest microbial richness. On the other hand, saliva and feces also presented more distinct communities between themselves when compared with ruminal samples. Our data showed that the saliva microbiome is not representative of the rumen microbiome and should not be used as an easy-to-collect sample for studies about the rumen microbiome.

Indexed as

Animal FeedMicrobiotaAnimalsCattleFecesFemaleGastrointestinal TractRNA, Ribosomal, 16SRumenRNA, Ribosomal, 16S

Identifiers

PMID36538559
PMCPMC9767327

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.