Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37957747›Full record

ArticleJournal of animal science and biotechnology2023

Composition, function, and timing: exploring the early-life gut microbiota in piglets for probiotic interventions.

Jianping Quan, Cineng Xu, Donglin Ruan, Yong Ye, Yibin Qiu, Jie Wu, Shenping Zhou, Menghao Luan, Xiang Zhao, Yue Chen and 7 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of animal science and biotechnology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing 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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Frontiers in immunology · 2025
    Article
  12. 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

17 authors.

Jianping Quan *College of Animal Science and National Engineering Research Center for Breeding Swine Industry, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, People's Republic of China.
Cineng Xu *College of Animal Science and National Engineering Research Center for Breeding Swine Industry, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, People's Republic of China.
Donglin RuanCollege of Animal Science and National Engineering Research Center for Breeding Swine Industry, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, People's Republic of China.
Yong YeCollege of Animal Science and National Engineering Research Center for Breeding Swine Industry, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, People's Republic of China.
Yibin QiuCollege of Animal Science and National Engineering Research Center for Breeding Swine Industry, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, People's Republic of China.
Jie WuCollege of Animal Science and National Engineering Research Center for Breeding Swine Industry, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, People's Republic of China.
Shenping ZhouCollege of Animal Science and National Engineering Research Center for Breeding Swine Industry, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, People's Republic of China.
Menghao LuanCollege of Animal Science and National Engineering Research Center for Breeding Swine Industry, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, People's Republic of China.
Xiang ZhaoCollege of Animal Science and National Engineering Research Center for Breeding Swine Industry, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, People's Republic of China.
Yue ChenCollege of Animal Science and National Engineering Research Center for Breeding Swine Industry, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, People's Republic of China.
Danyang LinCollege of Animal Science and National Engineering Research Center for Breeding Swine Industry, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, People's Republic of China.
Ying SunCollege of Animal Science and National Engineering Research Center for Breeding Swine Industry, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, People's Republic of China.
Jifei YangCollege of Animal Science and National Engineering Research Center for Breeding Swine Industry, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, People's Republic of China.
Enqin ZhengCollege of Animal Science and National Engineering Research Center for Breeding Swine Industry, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, People's Republic of China.
Gengyuan CaiCollege of Animal Science and National Engineering Research Center for Breeding Swine Industry, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, People's Republic of China.
Zhenfang WuCollege of Animal Science and National Engineering Research Center for Breeding Swine Industry, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, People's Republic of China. wzfeamil@163.com.
Jie YangCollege of Animal Science and National Engineering Research Center for Breeding Swine Industry, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, People's Republic of China. jieyang2012@hotmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7031-2160

Funding

China Postdoctoral Science Foundation 2021M701263Key Technologies R&D Program of Guangdong Province project 2022B0202090002Local Innovative and Research Teams Project of Guangdong Province 2019BT02N630Project of Swine Innovation Team in the Guangdong Modern Agricultural Research System 2023KJ126
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe establishment of a robust gut microbiota in piglets during their early developmental stage holds the potential for long-term advantageous effects. However, the optimal timeframe for introducing probiotics to achieve this outcome remains uncertain.

resultsIn the context of this investigation, we conducted a longitudinal assessment of the fecal microbiota of 63 piglets at three distinct pre-weaning time points. Simultaneously, we gathered vaginal and fecal samples from 23 sows. Employing 16S rRNA gene and metagenomic sequencing methodologies, we conducted a comprehensive analysis of the fluctuation patterns in microbial composition, functional capacity, interaction networks, and colonization resistance within the gut microbiota of piglets. As the piglets progressed in age, discernible modifications in intestinal microbial diversity, composition, and function were observed. A source-tracking analysis unveiled the pivotal role of fecal and vaginal microbiota derived from sows in populating the gut microbiota of neonatal piglets. By D21, the microbial interaction network displayed a more concise and efficient configuration, accompanied by enhanced colonization resistance relative to the other two time points. Moreover, we identified three strains of Ruminococcus sp. at D10 as potential candidates for improving piglets' weight gain during the weaning phase.

conclusionsThe findings of this study propose that D10 represents the most opportune juncture for the introduction of external probiotic interventions during the early stages of piglet development. This investigation augments our comprehension of the microbiota dynamics in early-life of piglets and offers valuable insights for guiding forthcoming probiotic interventions.

Indexed as

Colonization resistanceIntestinal microbiotaPigletWeaningWeight gain

Identifiers

PMID37957747
PMCPMC10641937

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.