Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40078542›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in microbiology2025

Dynamic changes in the gut microbiota of SPF Bama piglets during breast and formula feeding.

Chengcheng Zhang, Zhengjiang Liu, Huan Yu, Yuanyuan Shen, Lu Lu, Fanli Kong, Wei Sun, Xiaoyuan Wei, Long Jin, Liangpeng Ge and 1 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in microbiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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.

Chengcheng Zhang *Key Laboratory of Livestock and Poultry Multi-omics, Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, Farm Animal Genetic Resources Exploration and Innovation Key Laboratory of Sichuan Province, College of Animal Science and Technology, Sichuan Agricultural University, Chengdu, China.
Zhengjiang Liu *State Key Laboratory of Swine and Poultry Breeding Industry, College of Life Science, Sichuan Agricultural University, Ya'an, China.
Huan YuKey Laboratory of Livestock and Poultry Multi-omics, Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, Farm Animal Genetic Resources Exploration and Innovation Key Laboratory of Sichuan Province, College of Animal Science and Technology, Sichuan Agricultural University, Chengdu, China.
Yuanyuan ShenKey Laboratory of Livestock and Poultry Multi-omics, Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, Farm Animal Genetic Resources Exploration and Innovation Key Laboratory of Sichuan Province, College of Animal Science and Technology, Sichuan Agricultural University, Chengdu, China.
Lu LuKey Laboratory of Livestock and Poultry Multi-omics, Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, Farm Animal Genetic Resources Exploration and Innovation Key Laboratory of Sichuan Province, College of Animal Science and Technology, Sichuan Agricultural University, Chengdu, China.
Fanli KongState Key Laboratory of Swine and Poultry Breeding Industry, College of Life Science, Sichuan Agricultural University, Ya'an, China.
Wei SunJoint International Research Laboratory of Agriculture and Agri-Product Safety of Ministry of Education of China, International Joint Research Laboratory in Universities of Jiangsu Province of China for Domestic Animal Germplasm Resources and Genetic Improvement, Yangzhou University, Yangzhou, China.
Xiaoyuan WeiDepartment of Internal Medicine, Morsani College of Medicine, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL, United States.
Long JinKey Laboratory of Livestock and Poultry Multi-omics, Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, Farm Animal Genetic Resources Exploration and Innovation Key Laboratory of Sichuan Province, College of Animal Science and Technology, Sichuan Agricultural University, Chengdu, China.
Liangpeng GeKey Laboratory of Pig Industry Sciences, Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, Chongqing Key Laboratory of Pig Industry Sciences, Chongqing, China.
Bo ZengKey Laboratory of Livestock and Poultry Multi-omics, Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, Farm Animal Genetic Resources Exploration and Innovation Key Laboratory of Sichuan Province, College of Animal Science and Technology, Sichuan Agricultural University, Chengdu, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The gut microbiota plays a crucial role in the growth performance, health status, and welfare of pigs. Breast milk is a key factor in the colonization of gut microbiota and the overall health of newborn piglets. With advancements in breeding technology, formula milk has been widely adopted as a substitute for breast milk. This study aims to investigate the effects of sow feeding (natural breastfeeding) and formula milk feeding on the gut microbiota of specific pathogen-free (SPF) Bama pigs. Using metagenomic sequencing technology, we analyzed 114 fecal samples to uncover the impacts of different feeding methods on gut microbial diversity, dominant microbial populations, metabolic functions, carbohydrate-active enzymes (CAZymes), and antibiotic resistance genes (ARGs). The results revealed significant differences in the structure and function of gut microbiota between the breast milk (BM) group and the formula milk (FM) group at day 21. The BM group exhibited higher gut microbial diversity compared to the FM group, along with more extensive metabolic functions at both the gene and species levels. Notably, the FM group demonstrated higher activity in galactose metabolism and glycan metabolism, particularly at day 21. Additionally, the FM group showed significantly higher levels of ARGs against glycopeptide antibiotics at days 21 and 28 compared to the BM group. This study also found that breastfeeding and formula feeding differentially regulate the metabolic activity of gut microbiota and the expression of related enzymes, which may have long-term effects on nutrient absorption and disease resistance in pigs. These findings provide new insights into how different feeding methods shape the gut microbiota of pigs and offer a scientific basis for optimizing feeding strategies and improving breeding efficiency.

Indexed as

breastfeedingformula feedinggut microbiotametagenomicspig breedingSPF Bama pig

Identifiers

PMID40078542
PMCPMC11897505

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.