ArticleTropical animal health and production2023
Nutrient intake, digestibility and ruminal characteristics of lambs supplemented with probiotic.
Article in Tropical animal health and production, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Characterization of goat rumen-derived isolates and their effects onFrontiers in veterinary science · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The aim of this study was to evaluate the inclusion of different levels of probiotic in the diets of lambs, on ruminal characteristics, intake and digestibility of nutrients. The treatments were 0 (control group), 2, 4 and 6 g/day of probiotic doses, supplied orally and individually to the lambs. Four crossbred Santa Inês X Texel lambs were used, and the experimental design was a Latin square, with four treatments and four periods. Samples of diet, orts, feces, and ruminal fluid were collected from each animal. Intake and apparent digestibility variables were not different (p > 0.05) among the levels of probiotic evaluated. The average daily feed intake of lambs ranged from 1.27 to 1.28 kg of DM/day, and no significant differences (p > 0.05) were obtained between the levels of probiotics used in the diet. The percentage distribution of protozoa was not significant according to the different doses of probiotics used. A positive linear effect was obtained between the pH of the rumen fluid and the probiotic used, indicating that the highest pH values were obtained when the animals received the higher dose of 6 g probiotic; indicative that its use provides a ruminal environment closer to neutrality. The methylene blue reduction test in ruminal fluid samples did not differ between the different doses of probiotics used. The increasing levels of the probiotic in the diet of lambs are related to an increase in ruminal pH, without changing the levels of intake and digestibility of nutrients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
37074501What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.