ArticleScientific reports2024
Fewer culturable Lactobacillaceae species identified in faecal samples of pigs performing manipulative behaviour.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Associations Between Fine Particulate Matter-Associated Bacteria and Respiratory Tract Microbiota in Pigs.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026Article
- Do fermented herbal extracts affect pig behavior, health and productivity? An on-farm study.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2026Article
- The Role of Swine Gut Microbiota and Its Metabolites in Maintaining Intestinal Barrier Integrity and Mitigating Stress via the Gut-Brain Axis.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025Review
- Review: Gut Microbiota-A Powerful Tool for Improving Pig Welfare by Influencing Behavior Through the Gut-Brain Axis.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Manipulative behaviour that consists of touching or close contact with ears or tails of pen mates is common in pigs and can become damaging. Manipulative behaviour was analysed from video recordings of 45-day-old pigs, and 15 manipulator-control pairs (n = 30) were formed. Controls neither received nor performed manipulative behaviour. Rectal faecal samples of manipulators and controls were compared. 16S PCR was used to identify Lactobacillaceae species and 16S amplicon sequencing to determine faecal microbiota composition. Seven culturable Lactobacillaceae species were identified in control pigs and four in manipulator pigs. Manipulators (p = 0.02) and females (p = 0.005) expressed higher Lactobacillus amylovorus, and a significant interaction was seen (sex * status: p = 0.005) with this sex difference being more marked in controls. Females (p = 0.08) and manipulator pigs (p = 0.07) tended to express higher total Lactobacillaceae. A tendency for an interaction was seen in Limosilactobacillus reuteri (sex * status: p = 0.09). Results suggest a link between observed low diversity in Lactobacillaceae and the development of manipulative behaviour.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.