Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40036559›Full record

ReviewJournal of animal science2025

Use of biotics in animals: impact on nutrition, health, and food production.

Kelly S Swanson, Karin Allenspach, Gregory Amos, Thomas A Auchtung, Shalome A Bassett, Charlotte R Bjørnvad, Nadia Everaert, Susana M Martín-Orúe, Steven C Ricke, Elizabeth P Ryan and 1 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review 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 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Effects of feeding aTranslational animal science · 2026
    Article
  2. Review
  3. Potential ofMicroorganisms · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

11 authors.

Kelly S SwansonDepartment of Animal Sciences, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL 61801, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-5518-3076
Karin AllenspachDepartment of Pathology, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30602, USA.
Gregory AmosWaltham Petcare Science Institute, Melton Mowbray LE13, UK.
Thomas A AuchtungSynbiotic Health, Lincoln, NE 68508, USA.
Shalome A BassettFonterra Limited, Fonterra Research & Development Centre, Palmerston North 4442, New Zealand.
Charlotte R BjørnvadDepartment of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Nadia EveraertDepartment of Biosystems, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Susana M Martín-OrúeDepartment of Animal and Food Science, Animal Nutrition and Welfare Service, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Bellaterra, Spain.
Steven C RickeDepartment of Animal and Dairy Sciences, Meat Science and Animal Biologics Discovery Program, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI 53706, USA.
Elizabeth P RyanDepartment of Environmental and Radiological Health Sciences, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80524, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-1577-0919
George C FaheyDepartment of Animal Sciences, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL 61801, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Probiotics, prebiotics, and other biotic substances are not only effective ways to promote a healthy gastrointestinal tract, an effective immune system, and the overall health of humans, but also in agricultural and companion animals. Because key differences exist in regard to gastrointestinal tract anatomy and physiology, dietary management and feeding strategy, and disease susceptibility, however, biotic types and amounts often differ according to host species and life stage. Despite these differences, the literature demonstrates the value of biotics in agricultural and companion animal species. While high variability in responsiveness and efficacy has been reported, biotic substances may be effectively used to improve digestion, reduce morbidity, increase growth rate and/or efficiency in agricultural animals and promote gastrointestinal health and immune response in companion animals. As the oversight of antibiotic use intensifies, the population density of animals and humans increases, and production strategies of agricultural animals are more heavily scrutinized, the importance of biotics and other health promotors will continue to increase in the future. To date, the effects of animal biotic use have focused primarily on the farm, home, or veterinary clinic. In the future, their impact must be viewed on a larger scale. As global "One Health" approaches seek to reduce antimicrobial use and resistance and there are increasing demands for sustainable and safe food production, biotics will continue to be an important part of the solution. As knowledge of gastrointestinal microbiomes grows and the biotic field develops, more targeted and effective strategies for health promotion in these species are expected. At the 2023 International Scientific Association for Probiotics and Prebiotics meeting, experts were invited to participate in a discussion group focused on "The Use of Probiotics and Prebiotics in Agricultural and Companion Animals". This review reports the outcomes of that discussion, including the documented use of probiotics, prebiotics, and other biotic substances to promote health or treat disease in agricultural and companion animals, provide implications of animal biotic use on human health, and provide perspective on how scientific advances may impact the development and improvement of biotics in the future.

Indexed as

Animal HusbandryAnimal Nutritional Physiological PhenomenaPrebioticsProbioticsAnimal FeedAnimalsPrebioticsanimal healthantimicrobial resistancefood safetygastrointestinal healthimmune modulation

Identifiers

PMID40036559
PMCPMC12010704

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.