Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39841163›Full record

ArticleJournal of animal science2025

Lactobacillus and Saccharomyces fermentation products impact performance and the fecal microbiome in weanling pigs inoculated with enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli.

Tanya Cherrington, David Jordan, John Pluske, Josie Mansfield, Kittitat Lugsomya, Stuart Wilkinson, David Cadogan, Sam Abraham, Mark O'Dea

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of animal science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. The potential of yeast culture for alleviating enterotoxigenicAnimal nutrition (Zhongguo xu mu shou yi xue hui) · 2026
    Review
  3. Review
  4. 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

9 authors.

Tanya CherringtonAntimicrobial Resistance and Infectious Diseases Laboratory, Harry Butler Institute, Murdoch University, Murdoch, Western Australia, Australia.
David JordanAntimicrobial Resistance and Infectious Diseases Laboratory, Harry Butler Institute, Murdoch University, Murdoch, Western Australia, Australia.
John PluskeFaculty of Science, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-7194-2164
Josie MansfieldAntimicrobial Resistance and Infectious Diseases Laboratory, Harry Butler Institute, Murdoch University, Murdoch, Western Australia, Australia.
Kittitat LugsomyaAntimicrobial Resistance and Infectious Diseases Laboratory, Harry Butler Institute, Murdoch University, Murdoch, Western Australia, Australia.
Stuart WilkinsonFeedworks Pty Ltd, Romsey, Victoria, Australia.
David CadoganFeedworks Pty Ltd, Romsey, Victoria, Australia.
Sam AbrahamAntimicrobial Resistance and Infectious Diseases Laboratory, Harry Butler Institute, Murdoch University, Murdoch, Western Australia, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-0950-2317
Mark O'DeaAntimicrobial Resistance and Infectious Diseases Laboratory, Harry Butler Institute, Murdoch University, Murdoch, Western Australia, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEnterotoxigenic F4 Escherichia coli (F4-ETEC) pose an economic threat to the swine industry through reduced growth, increased mortality and morbidity, and increased costs associated with treatment. Prevention and treatment of F4-ETEC often rely on antimicrobials; however, due to the threat of antimicrobial resistance, antimicrobial use is being minimized, and hence alternative control methods are needed. This study investigated the effects of postbiotics in the form of Lactobacillus acidophilus fermentation products (LFP) and Saccharomyces cerevisiae fermentation products (SFP), on pigs challenged with an F4 ETEC strain. Eighty pigs were selected based on a prescreening F4-ETEC susceptibility test. The animals were divided into 5 treatments each with 4 replicate pens. Pigs were assigned to 5 different diets: a control diet (CON); CON diet with 3,000 ppm ZnO (ZnO); CON diet with 2,000 ppm LFP (LFP); CON diet with 2,000 ppm SFP (SFP); CON diet with both 2,000 ppm LFP and 2,000 ppm SFP (LAS). Pigs were inoculated per os with F4-ETEC twice, on day 0 and day 1 of the experiment.

resultsNo significant differences in fecal consistency scores or fecal F4-ETEC concentration in pigs supplemented with LFP and/or SFP were detected. An increased diversity and abundance of Lactobacillaceae in the fecal microbiome of pigs supplemented with LFP were detected, as well as an increased final liveweight of pigs supplemented with LFP and/or SFP.

conclusionThis study demonstrated that the fecal microbiome is modified in F4-ETEC-challenged pigs supplemented with the combination of LFP and SFP, with these modifications previously associated with increased growth performance and health status in young pigs. Pigs receiving this combination of postbiotics also demonstrated an increased final liveweight, indicating that management of ETEC-associated performance loss may not require the complete removal of ETEC from a production system.

Indexed as

Enterotoxigenic Escherichia coliEscherichia coli InfectionsGastrointestinal MicrobiomeLactobacillus acidophilusProbioticsSaccharomyces cerevisiaeSwine DiseasesAnimal FeedAnimalsDietFecesFemaleFermentationMaleSwineETECLactobacillus acidophilus fermentation products (LFP)liveweightmicrobiomepigsSaccharomyces cerevisiae fermentation products (SFP)

Identifiers

PMID39841163
PMCPMC11842899

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.