Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40429218›Full record

ArticleInsects2025

Effects of Three Different Bee Pollen on Digestion, Immunity, Antioxidant Capacity, and Gut Microbes in

Xin-Meng Li, Ying Wang, Li Lei, Ge Zhang, Bao-Hua Xu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Insects, 2025. 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

5 authors.

Xin-Meng LiKey Laboratory of Efficient Utilization of Non-Grain Feed Resources (Co-Construction by Ministry and Province), Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, Shandong Provincial Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition and Efficient Feeding, College of Animal Science and Technology, Shandong Agricultural University, Tai'an 271018, China.
Ying WangKey Laboratory of Efficient Utilization of Non-Grain Feed Resources (Co-Construction by Ministry and Province), Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, Shandong Provincial Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition and Efficient Feeding, College of Animal Science and Technology, Shandong Agricultural University, Tai'an 271018, China.ORCID 0000-0003-0270-7897
Li LeiKey Laboratory of Efficient Utilization of Non-Grain Feed Resources (Co-Construction by Ministry and Province), Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, Shandong Provincial Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition and Efficient Feeding, College of Animal Science and Technology, Shandong Agricultural University, Tai'an 271018, China.
Ge ZhangKey Laboratory of Efficient Utilization of Non-Grain Feed Resources (Co-Construction by Ministry and Province), Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, Shandong Provincial Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition and Efficient Feeding, College of Animal Science and Technology, Shandong Agricultural University, Tai'an 271018, China.
Bao-Hua XuKey Laboratory of Efficient Utilization of Non-Grain Feed Resources (Co-Construction by Ministry and Province), Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, Shandong Provincial Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition and Efficient Feeding, College of Animal Science and Technology, Shandong Agricultural University, Tai'an 271018, China.

Funding

National Natural Science Foundation of China No. 32272937the earmarked fund for China Agriculture Research System CARS-44the Key R&D Program of Shandong Province, China No. 2023TZXD079 and 2023LZGC017
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The nutritional value of pollen for honeybees varies significantly depending on its source. This study examines the nutrient composition of three types of bee-collected pollen-Maize bee-collected pollen (MBP), Lotus bee-collected pollen (LBP), and Sunflower bee-collected pollen (SBP)-and their effects on honeybee digestion, immunity, and gut microbiota. Nutritional analysis revealed no significant differences in moisture, protein, and carbohydrate content among the three pollen types. However, sunflower bee-collected pollen exhibited a significantly lower crude fat content than maize bee-collected pollen and lotus bee-collected pollen, while lotus bee-collected pollen had a significantly higher crude ash content than the other pollen types. Additionally, notable differences in amino acid composition were observed across the three pollen types. Feeding assays demonstrated that honeybees consumed significantly more sunflower bee-collected pollen than maize bee-collected pollen or lotus bee-collected pollen. Honeybees fed sunflower bee-collected pollen exhibited reduced lipid deposition, enhanced immune enzyme activity, and increased expression of immune-related genes. Protein digestibility was highest in honeybees fed lotus bee-collected pollen, whereas protease and lipase activities were significantly lower in those consuming sunflower bee-collected pollen. Notably, honeybees fed sunflower bee-collected pollen had thinner midgut intestinal walls. Furthermore, the microbial structure of the honeybee gut was altered depending on the type of different pollen. In summary, honeybees had the worst digestibility of Sunflower bee-collected pollen; sunflower bee pollen had a greater effect on antioxidant and immune functions, and intestinal flora of honeybees. These findings underscore the influence of different types of pollen on honeybee nutrition, immunity, and gut microbiota, offering a foundation for optimizing pollen diets to support honeybee health.

Indexed as

Apis melliferabee-collected pollendigestiongut microbiotahealthnutrition

Identifiers

PMID40429218
PMCPMC12112133

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.