Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40752197›Full record

ArticlePoultry science2025

Harnessing probiotics and bacteriophages to fight Salmonella and limit the use of antibiotics in broilers: a study in commercial conditions.

Irene Soffritti, Maria D'Accolti, Francesca Bini, Eleonora Mazziga, Antonella Volta, Matteo Bisi, Sante Mazzacane, Alessandra De Cesare, Valentina Indio, Gerardo Manfreda and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Poultry 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. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
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.

Irene SoffrittiDepartment of Environmental and Prevention Sciences, University of Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy.
Maria D'AccoltiDepartment of Environmental and Prevention Sciences, University of Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy.
Francesca BiniDepartment of Environmental and Prevention Sciences, University of Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy.
Eleonora MazzigaDepartment of Environmental and Prevention Sciences, University of Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy.
Antonella VoltaCIAS Research Centre, TekneHub, University of Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy.
Matteo BisiCIAS Research Centre, TekneHub, University of Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy.
Sante MazzacaneCIAS Research Centre, TekneHub, University of Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy.
Alessandra De CesareDepartment of Veterinary Medical Sciences, University of Bologna, Ozzano Bologna, Italy.
Valentina IndioDepartment of Veterinary Medical Sciences, University of Bologna, Ozzano Bologna, Italy.
Gerardo ManfredaDepartment of Agricultural and Food Science, University of Bologna, Ozzano Bologna, Italy.
Elisabetta CaselliDepartment of Environmental and Prevention Sciences, University of Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy; CIAS Research Centre, TekneHub, University of Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy. Electronic address: csb@unife.it.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The poultry industry is facing the growing need to decrease the use of antibiotics to prevent increasing antimicrobial resistance (AMR). Toward this aim, probiotics and bacteriophages have been suggested as an alternative to antibiotics to reducing Salmonella in broilers, which poses risks to food safety and public health. Previous results showed that selected Bacillus probiotics can significantly limit broiler contamination, and anti-Salmonella phages are already available in the US and EU. However, a comprehensive evaluation of the impact of probiotics and phages on commercial poultry farms is still lacking. To this aim, a pre-post study was conducted in a poultry farm experiencing recurrent Salmonella outbreaks, to assess the anti-Salmonella effectiveness of a combined probiotic-phage approach. The study included two complete rearing cycles: T1, conducted in standard conditions and used as a control, and T2, when probiotics and phages were applied. Salmonella monitoring was performed in both the environment and broilers throughout the study periods, showing a significant 90 % decrease in Salmonella presence in T2 compared to T1 cycle (P ≤ 0.001). The decrease was observed at both the environmental and animal (caeca) levels. Notably, the whole broiler caecal microbiome was modified in T2 compared to T1 broilers, evidencing a significant increase in biodiversity accompanied by an earlier appearance of Ruminococcus, Clostridium, and Faecalibacterium genera. In parallel, broiler mortality was reduced by 72 % and broiler weight was increased by 6.4 % in T2 vs. T1 broilers (P ≤ 0.01). The findings indicate that a combined probiotic/phage approach could be a promising strategy to combat the Salmonella burden, while reducing the requirement for antibiotics and improving broiler health.

Indexed as

Anti-Bacterial AgentsBacteriophagesChickensGastrointestinal MicrobiomePoultry DiseasesProbioticsSalmonellaSalmonella Infections, AnimalSalmonella PhagesAnimal HusbandryAnimalsAnti-Bacterial AgentsBacteriophagePoultryProbioticSalmonella

Identifiers

PMID40752197
PMCPMC12341612

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.