Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37842054›Full record

SynthesisPeerJ2023

Microbiota plasticity in tilapia gut revealed by meta-analysis evaluating the effect of probiotics, prebiotics, and biofloc.

Marcel Martinez-Porchas, Aranza Preciado-Álvarez, Francisco Vargas-Albores, Martina Hilda Gracia-Valenzuela, Francesco Cicala, Luis Rafael Martinez-Cordova, Diana Medina-Félix, Estefania Garibay-Valdez

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PeerJ, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. DietaryAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
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

8 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Marcel Martinez-Porchas *Biología de Organismos Acuáticos, Centro de Investigación en Alimentación y Desarrollo, Hermosillo, Sonora, Mexico.
Aranza Preciado-Álvarez *Biología de Organismos Acuáticos, Centro de Investigación en Alimentación y Desarrollo, Hermosillo, Sonora, Mexico.
Francisco Vargas-AlboresBiología de Organismos Acuáticos, Centro de Investigación en Alimentación y Desarrollo, Hermosillo, Sonora, Mexico.
Martina Hilda Gracia-ValenzuelaTecnológico Nacional de México/Instituto Tecnológico del Valle del Yaqui, Bácum, Sonora, México.
Francesco CicalaDepartment of Comparative Biomedicine and Food Science, University of Padova, Legnaro, Province of Padua, Italy.
Luis Rafael Martinez-CordovaDepartamento de Investigaciones Científicas y Tecnológicas, Universidad de Sonora, Hermosillo, Sonora, Mexico.
Diana Medina-FélixDepartamento de Ecología, Universidad Estatal de Sonora, Hermosillo, Sonora, Mexico.
Estefania Garibay-ValdezBiología de Organismos Acuáticos, Centro de Investigación en Alimentación y Desarrollo, Hermosillo, Sonora, Mexico.
Centro de Investigación en Alimentación y Desarrollo · MXTecnológico Nacional de México · MXUniversidad de Sonora · MXUniversidad Estatal de SonoraUniversity of Padua · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Tilapia species are among the most cultivated fish worldwide due to their biological advantages but face several challenges, including environmental impact and disease outbreaks. Feed additives, such as probiotics, prebiotics, and other microorganisms, have emerged as strategies to protect against pathogens and promote immune system activation and other host responses, with consequent reductions in antibiotic use. Because these additives also influence tilapia's gut microbiota and positively affect the tilapia culture, we assume it is a flexible annex organ capable of being subject to significant modifications without affecting the biological performance of the host. Therefore, we evaluated the effect of probiotics and other additives ingested by tilapia on its gut microbiota through a meta-analysis of several bioprojects studying the tilapia gut microbiota exposed to feed additives (probiotic, prebiotic, biofloc). A total of 221 tilapia gut microbiota samples from 14 bioprojects were evaluated. Alpha and beta diversity metrics showed no differentiation patterns in relation to the control group, either comparing additives as a group or individually. Results also revealed a control group with a wide dispersion pattern even when these fish did not receive additives. After concatenating the information, the tilapia gut core microbiota was represented by four enriched phyla including Proteobacteria (31%), Fusobacteria (23%), Actinobacteria (19%), and Firmicutes (16%), and seven minor phyla Planctomycetes (1%), Chlamydiae (1%), Chloroflexi (1%), Cyanobacteria (1%), Spirochaetes (1%), Deinococcus Thermus (1%), and Verrucomicrobia (1%). Finally, results suggest that the tilapia gut microbiota is a dynamic microbial community that can plastically respond to feed additives exposure with the potential to influence its taxonomic profile allowing a considerable optimal range of variation, probably guaranteeing its physiological function under different circumstances.

Indexed as

MicrobiotaProbioticsTilapiaAnimalsAquacultureBacteriaPrebioticsPrebioticsFeed additivesFish nutritionImmunostimulantsMicrobiota flexibilityMicrobiota plasticity

Identifiers

PMID37842054
PMCPMC10576497
OpenAlexW4387532594

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.