ArticleEnvironmental research2025
Animal farming and the oral microbiome in the Agricultural Health Study.
Article in Environmental research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
23 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundRaising farm animals imparts various exposures that may shape the human microbiome. The oral microbiome has been increasingly implicated in disease development. Animal farming has also been associated with certain chronic diseases such as cancer; however, underlying biological mechanisms are unclear. We investigated associations between raising farm animals and the oral microbiome in the Agricultural Health Study.
methodsThis analysis included 1,245 participants (865 farmers and 380 spouses) who provided oral wash specimens and information on types and numbers of specific animals raised on their farms within 2 years before sample collection. The oral microbiome was measured by sequencing the V4 region of the 16S ribosomal RNA gene. We evaluated associations of farm animal exposures with alpha and beta diversity metrics (within- and between-sample diversity, respectively), as well as presence and relative abundance of specific bacterial genera. All analyses adjusted for potential confounders (e.g., age, sex, smoking, alcohol consumption).
resultsOverall, 63 % of participants raised farm animals, most commonly cattle (46 %) and hogs (20 %). Those who raised a large number of hogs (≥2,000 vs. no hogs) had higher alpha diversity. Conversely, raising sheep/goats and raising larger numbers of poultry were associated with lower alpha diversity. Beta diversity was not significantly different between participants with and without any farm animals. Participants raising any farm animals had higher relative abundance of Porphyromonas and lower relative abundances of Prevotella and Ruminococcaceae UCG-014. Several genera were more likely to be absent with specific animal exposures (e.g., Capnocytophaga for cattle and sheep/goats; Corynebacterium, Dialister, Stomatobaculum, and Solobacterium for sheep/goats and poultry).
conclusionsThis was the largest study of farm animal exposures and the human microbiome to date. Findings suggest that raising specific farm animals may influence the oral microbiome, supporting the need to further investigate the potential role of animal farming in disease etiology.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.