ArticleBMC research notes2025
Effect of an antibiotic and a probiotic on phage communities in the swine gut microbiota.
Article in BMC research notes, 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThe impact of dietary treatments on the phage community of porcine intestinal microbiota is not well understood. An antibiotic (tylvalosin), a probiotic (Pediococcus acidilactici), and a combination of these were given to six cannulated pigs in a double crossover design study. Samples of ileal digesta and feces were collected and whole genome shotgun sequencing was performed. The variations in phage and bacterial communities were compared for each treatment and sample type.
resultsThe bacteriophages present in the gut microbiome exhibited greater variations in both α- and β-diversity between sample types (digesta, feces) than between treatments. β-diversity and differential abundance showed that the effect of the combined antibiotic and probiotic treatment was the same as with the antibiotic alone. However, the effects of the probiotic and antibiotic treatments were statistically significantly different in the fecal samples. β-diversity was different in those two treatments, and differential abundance analysis identified multiple phages as markers for each treatment. No significant variations in relative abundance were found in phage lifestyle (i.e., virulent, temperate) between treatments.
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.