ArticleFEMS microbiology ecology2025
The impact of pooling on the observed microbiome profile of preweaned piglet feces.
Article in FEMS microbiology ecology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Lactococcus lactis NZ3900/pNZ8149-ChIL-4-ChIL-2 alleviates compound stress in chicks via reshaping immune homeostasis, gut microbiota and intestinal health.Poultry science · 2026Article
- Microbiota variation inMicrobiology spectrum · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Pooling individual samples could be an efficient approach for large-scale population-based microbiome studies. However, it is unknown whether pooled samples accurately reflect the microbiome composition and diversity obtained from individual samples. This study investigated the impact of various pooling methods on the observed fecal microbiome of preweaned piglets. Individual fecal samples were collected from 10 litters of day-old piglets (N = 137) and 10 litters of 20-day-old piglets (N = 121), as well as pen-floor samples from the same litters. The individually collected samples were processed individually and also used to create pools of both raw feces and extracted DNA. Individual samples, raw feces pools, DNA pools, and pen-floor samples were subjected to 16S rRNA gene sequencing. The microbial profile in pen-floor samples from litters of preweaned piglets was very different from individual piglet samples within the pen; thus, they may not be suitable for litter-level piglet microbiome studies. However, overall microbial diversity and composition from DNA and feces pools were comparable to individual samples, despite potentially underestimating some low-abundance or low-prevalence taxa. These results suggest that pooling can be used as an efficient and cost-effective approach to characterize litter-level microbial profiles for current and future population-level microbiome research in preweaned piglet populations.
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.