Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37306709›Full record

ArticleApplied microbiology and biotechnology2023

Exploring the rumen microbiota of Hu lambs in response to diet with paper mulberry.

Yi Xiong, Xin Wang, Xiaomei Li, Linna Guo, Fuyu Yang, Kuikui Ni

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Applied microbiology and biotechnology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
4.2field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. A review for nutritional value ofFrontiers in veterinary science · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Yi XiongCollege of Grassland Science and Technology, China Agricultural University, Beijing, 100193, China.
Xin WangCollege of Grassland Science and Technology, China Agricultural University, Beijing, 100193, China.
Xiaomei LiCollege of Grassland Science and Technology, China Agricultural University, Beijing, 100193, China.
Linna GuoCollege of Biological Engineering, Henan University of Technology, Zhengzhou, 450001, China.
Fuyu YangCollege of Grassland Science and Technology, China Agricultural University, Beijing, 100193, China. yfuyu@126.com.
Kuikui NiCollege of Grassland Science and Technology, China Agricultural University, Beijing, 100193, China. nikk@cau.edu.cn.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7133-1558
China Agricultural University · CNGuizhou University · CNHenan University of Technology · CN

Funding

National Key Research and Development Program No.2021YFD1000102National Natural Science Foundation of China No.32001402National Natural Science Foundation of China No.32171686Research and Demonstration of Key Technologies for Efficient Planting, Processing and Utilization of Hybrid Paper Mulberry in Hills and Mountains CSTC2020NGZX0000
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Paper mulberry (Broussonetia papyrifera), as a new woody forage with high-protein characteristic, is being widely used in ruminant feeding. However, little is known about the comprehensive microbiota picture of whole ruminal niches (liquid, solid, and epithelium) under paper mulberry diet. To gain a better understanding of feeding paper mulberry on the rumen microbiota, the effects of fresh paper mulberry, paper mulberry silage, or a conventional high-protein alfalfa silage on rumen fermentation products and microbiota in rumen niches of Hu lambs were studied. Forty-five Hu lambs were randomly divided into 3 treatments with 15 replicates in each treatment. No significant difference was observed among treatments in the average daily gain (ADG). The fresh paper mulberry treatment had lower (P < 0.05) pH and higher (P < 0.05) total volatile fatty acids (TVFA) compared with silage treatments, but the fermentation parameters did not show significant differences between paper mulberry silage and alfalfa silage treatments. The Shannon index did not show a significant difference (P < 0.05) among treatments except between fresh paper mulberry and alfalfa silage treatment in rumen epithelial niches. Butyrivibrio and Treponema were the predominant genera in the rumen epithelial fraction, while Prevotella and Rikenellaceae_RC9 dominated in both rumen liquid and solid fractions. These results indicated the paper mulberry supplement did not have distinct impact on the microbial diversity and growth performance compared with alfalfa silage, especially for paper mulberry silage, which might help us develop an alternative animal feeding strategy of replacing alfalfa with paper mulberry. KEY POINTS: • Feeding paper mulberry silage did not show significant impact on the growth performance compared with alfalfa silage treatment. • Feeding fresh paper mulberry reduced rumen pH value and increased total volatile fatty acid. • The microbial diversity did not show significant difference among treatments.

Indexed as

BroussonetiaMicrobiotaMorusAnimal FeedAnimalsDietFatty Acids, VolatileFemaleFermentationLactationMedicago sativaMilkRumenSheepSilageFatty Acids, VolatileAlfalfa silageHu lambsPaper mulberryRumen microbiota

Identifiers

PMID37306709
OpenAlexW4380290956

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.