Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39432555›Full record

ArticleJournal of animal science2024

Effect of yeast probiotics in lactation and yeast cell wall prebiotic and Bacillus subtilis probiotic in nursery on lifetime growth performance, immune response, and carcass characteristics.

Abigail K Jenkins, Joel M DeRouchey, Jordan T Gebhardt, Mike D Tokach, Jason C Woodworth, Robert D Goodband, Joseph A Loughmiller, Brian T Kremer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of animal science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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.

Abigail K JenkinsDepartment of Animal Sciences and Industry, College of Agriculture, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS, USA.
Joel M DeRoucheyDepartment of Animal Sciences and Industry, College of Agriculture, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS, USA.
Jordan T GebhardtDepartment of Diagnostic Medicine/Pathobiology, College of Veterinary Medicine, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS, USA.
Mike D TokachDepartment of Animal Sciences and Industry, College of Agriculture, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS, USA.
Jason C WoodworthDepartment of Animal Sciences and Industry, College of Agriculture, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-7268-4278
Robert D GoodbandDepartment of Animal Sciences and Industry, College of Agriculture, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS, USA.
Joseph A LoughmillerPhileo by Lesaffre, Milwaukee, WI, USA.
Brian T KremerPhileo by Lesaffre, Milwaukee, WI, USA.

Funding

Kansas Agricultural Experiment StationPhileo by Lesaffre
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Twenty-eight mixed-parity sows (Line 241; DNA) and their offspring were used to evaluate live yeast supplementation during lactation with or without a pre/probiotic combination during the nursery period on lactation performance, lifetime growth performance, and immune response. On day 110 of gestation, sows were allotted to a lactation diet with or without a live yeast probiotic (0.10% Actisaf Sc 47 HR+; Phileo by Lesaffre, Milwaukee, WI). At weaning, their offspring (350 pigs; initially 6.1 ± 0.02 kg) were randomly assigned in a 2 × 2 factorial with main effects of sow treatment and nursery treatment consisting of a control diet or a diet with a yeast cell wall prebiotic and Bacillus subtilis probiotic (0.10% YB; Phileo by Lesaffre, Milwaukee, WI) fed for 42 d followed by common diets fed until marketing. Two nursery pens were combined into 1 finishing pen, such that there were 5 and 10 pigs per pen with 17 or 18 and 8 or 9 replications per treatment during the nursery and finishing periods, respectively. There were no significant effects of yeast supplementation on lactation performance (P ≥ 0.079). There was a sow × nursery diet interaction (P = 0.024) on nursery ADG. Pigs from yeast-fed sows had increased ADG when fed control nursery diets compared to pigs from control sows fed the control nursery diet with pigs fed pre/probiotic nursery diets intermediate, regardless of sow diet. Pigs from yeast-fed sows tended (P = 0.067) to have greater final body weight (BW) (day 165). A subset of pigs was sampled throughout their lifetime to determine serum porcine circovirus type 2 (PCV2) and Mycoplasma hyopneumoniae antibody sample-to-positive (S/P) ratios and percentage inhibition of Lawsonia intracellularis. There was a tendency for a PCV2 S/P ratio sow diet × day interaction (P = 0.097) where progeny from yeast-fed sows had higher PCV2 S/P ratios at 101 d of age compared to control sow progeny (P = 0.046). There was a PCV2 S/P ratio nursery diet × day interaction (P = 0.036) where pigs fed a pre/probiotic combination had reduced S/P ratios at 66, 78, and 162 d of age (P ≤ 0.022); however, at 22 d of age pigs fed a pre/probiotic combination tended to have an increased S/P ratio (P = 0.051). In conclusion, the effects of combining a yeast probiotic in lactation diets and a pre/probiotic in nursery diets were not additive. However, feeding a live yeast probiotic during lactation resulted in tendencies (P ≤ 0.10) for increased progeny final BW and hot carcass weight.

Indexed as

Animal FeedAnimal Nutritional Physiological PhenomenaBacillus subtilisDietLactationPrebioticsProbioticsAnimalsBody CompositionCell WallDietary SupplementsFemaleRandom AllocationSaccharomyces cerevisiaeSwineYeastsPrebioticsfinishing pigimmune responselactating sownursery pigyeast cell wallyeast probiotics

Identifiers

PMID39432555
PMCPMC11561585

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.