ArticleGenetics, selection, evolution : GSE2024
The potential of microbiota information to better predict efficiency traits in growing pigs fed a conventional and a high-fiber diet.
Article in Genetics, selection, evolution : GSE, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- The hologenome concept and its implications for animal breeding in the multi-omics Era.Genetics and molecular biology · 2026Article
- The gut microbiota as a predictor of feed efficiency and feeding behavior in Iberian pigs.Journal of animal science · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundImproving pigs' ability to digest diets with an increased dietary fiber content is a lever to improve feed efficiency and limit feed costs in pig production. The aim of this study was to determine whether information on the gut microbiota and host genetics can contribute to predict digestive efficiency (DE, i.e. digestibility coefficients of energy, organic matter, and nitrogen), feed efficiency (FE, i.e. feed conversion ratio and residual feed intake), average daily gain, and daily feed intake phenotypes. Data were available for 1082 pigs fed a conventional or high-fiber diet. Fecal samples were collected at 16 weeks, and DE was estimated using near‑infrared spectrometry. A cross-validation approach was used to predict traits within the same diet, for the opposite diet, and for a combination of both diets, by implementing three models, i.e. with only genomic (Gen), only microbiota (Micro), and both genomic and microbiota information (Micro+Gen). The predictive ability with and without sharing common sires and breeding environment was also evaluated. Prediction accuracy of the phenotypes was calculated as the correlation between model prediction and phenotype adjusted for fixed effects.
resultsPrediction accuracies of the three models were low to moderate (< 0.47) for growth and FE traits and not significantly different between models. In contrast, for DE traits, prediction accuracies of model Gen were low (< 0.30) and those of models Micro and Micro+Gen were moderate to high (> 0.52). Prediction accuracies were not affected by the stratification of diets in the reference and validation sets and were in the same order of magnitude within the same diet, for the opposite diet, and for the combination of both diets. Prediction accuracies of the three models were significantly higher when pigs in the reference and validation populations shared common sires and breeding environment than when they did not (P < 0.001).
conclusionsThe microbiota is a relevant source of information to predict DE regardless of the diet, but not to predict growth and FE traits for which prediction accuracies were similar to those obtained with genomic information only. Further analyses on larger datasets and more diverse diets should be carried out to complement and consolidate these results.
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.