Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38904897›Full record

ArticleProbiotics and antimicrobial proteins2025

Dietary Supplementation of Compound Probiotics Improves Intestinal Health by Modulated Microbiota and Its SCFA Products as Alternatives to In-Feed Antibiotics.

Wenxing Wang, Guoqi Dang, Wei Hao, Anping Li, Hongfu Zhang, Shu Guan, Teng Ma

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Probiotics and antimicrobial proteins, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing 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

21 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. MitigatingMicroorganisms · 2026
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Repurposing 1,4-Dihydropyridine Scaffold: 4-Imidazo[2,1-Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

7 authors.

Wenxing Wang *State Key Laboratory of Livestock and Poultry Nutrition and Feeding, Institute of Animal Sciences, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing, 100193, China.
Guoqi Dang *State Key Laboratory of Livestock and Poultry Nutrition and Feeding, Institute of Animal Sciences, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing, 100193, China.
Wei HaoDepartment of Animal Nutrition and Health, DSM (China) Co., Ltd, Shanghai, 201203, China.
Anping LiDepartment of Animal Nutrition and Health, DSM (China) Co., Ltd, Shanghai, 201203, China.
Hongfu ZhangState Key Laboratory of Livestock and Poultry Nutrition and Feeding, Institute of Animal Sciences, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing, 100193, China.
Shu GuanDepartment of Animal Nutrition and Health, DSM Singapore Industrial Pte. Ltd, Singapore, 117440, Singapore.
Teng MaState Key Laboratory of Livestock and Poultry Nutrition and Feeding, Institute of Animal Sciences, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing, 100193, China. mateng@caas.cn.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Enterococcus faecium, Bifidobacterium, and Pediococcus acidilactici, as intestinal probiotics, have been proved to play a positive role in treating intestinal diseases, promoting growth and immune regulation in poultry. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of compound probiotics on growth performance, digestive enzyme activity, intestinal microbiome characteristics, as well as intestinal morphology in broiler chickens. Treatment diets with chlortetracycline and compound probiotics were used for two groups of sixty broilers each throughout the feeding process. Another group was fed the basal diet. The BW (2589.41 ± 13.10 g vs 2422.50 ± 19.08 g) and ADG (60.57 ± 0.31 g vs 56.60 ± 0.45 g) of the compound probiotics added feed treatment group were significantly increased, and the FCR was significantly decreased (P < 0.05). The supplementation of a compound probiotics enhanced the abundance of beneficial bacteria such as Lactobacillus, Faecalibacterium, and norank_f_norank_o_Clostridia_vadinBB60_group (P < 0.05), and modulated the cecal microbiota structure, thereby promoting the production of short-chain fatty acids (SCFAs) and elevating their levels (P < 0.05), particularly propionic and butyric acids. Furthermore, the administration of the compound probiotics supplements significantly enhanced the villi height, V/C ratio, and reduced the crypt depth (P < 0.05). In addition, the activity of digestive enzymes in the duodenum and jejunum was elevated (P < 0.05). Collectively, the selected compound probiotics supplemented in this experiment have demonstrated efficacy, warranting further application in practical production settings as a viable alternative to antibiotics, thereby facilitating efficient production and promoting gastrointestinal health.

Indexed as

ChickensDietary SupplementsFatty Acids, VolatileGastrointestinal MicrobiomeIntestinesProbioticsAnimal FeedAnimalsAnti-Bacterial AgentsMaleAnti-Bacterial AgentsFatty Acids, VolatileCompound probioticsDigestive enzymesIntestinal morphologyMicrobiotaSCFAs

Identifiers

PMID38904897
PMCPMC12405047

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.