Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41317362›Full record

ArticleJournal of animal science2026

Effects of feeding a Bacillus-based probiotic on nutrient utilization and microbiota profile in the rumen and reproductive tract of beef heifers receiving a forage-based diet.

Izadora S De Souza, Reinaldo F Cooke, Shea J Mackey, Thainá Minela, Zachary K Seekford, Giuseppe Copani, Raphaele Gresse, Kelsey M Harvey, Ky G Pohler, João M B Vendramini and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of animal science, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Effects of feeding aTranslational animal science · 2026
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Effects of supplementing aTranslational animal science · 2026
    Article
  5. Effects ofTranslational animal science · 2026
    Article
  6. Effects of feeding aTranslational animal science · 2026
    Article
  7. A retrospective evaluation on the effects of aTranslational animal science · 2026
    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.

Izadora S De SouzaDepartment of Animal Science, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843.
Reinaldo F CookeDepartment of Animal Science, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843.ORCID 0000-0002-7497-3601
Shea J MackeyDepartment of Animal Science, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843.
Thainá MinelaDepartment of Animal Science, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843.
Zachary K SeekfordDepartment of Animal Science, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843.
Giuseppe CopaniNovonesis, Lyngby 2800, Denmark.
Raphaele GresseNovonesis, Lyngby 2800, Denmark.
Kelsey M HarveyPrairie Research Unit, Mississippi State University, Prairie, MS 39756.
Ky G PohlerDepartment of Animal Science, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843.
João M B VendraminiStephenville Research and Extension Center, Texas A&M AgriLife Research, Stephenville, TX 76401.ORCID 0000-0003-3383-1620
Bruno I CappellozzaNovonesis, Lyngby 2800, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0002-1819-4013

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This experiment evaluated the effects of feeding a Bacillus-based probiotic on rumen fermentation traits, apparent nutrient digestibility, microbiota profile in the rumen and reproductive tract of beef heifers receiving a forage-based diet. Sixteen rumen-cannulated, pubertal Angus-influenced heifers were used in a crossover design (35-d periods). Treatments included hay and concentrate (CON; n = 16) or CON with the addition of 3 g/heifer daily of Bacillus-based probiotic (BAC; n = 16). Blood samples were collected on days 0, 7, 14, 21, 28, and 35. Rumen fluid samples were collected on days 0, 14, and 28. Vaginal and uterine swabs were collected on day 28. On day 32 of each period, ruminal liquid fill, liquid dilution rate, forage dry matter (DM) and neutral detergent fiber (NDF) disappearance were assessed for 96 h. Apparent total-tract digestibility (ATTD) of nutrients was calculated using fecal samples collected from days 32 to 35. Data were analyzed using heifer as the experimental unit, and results from day 0 as covariate when appropriate. Ruminal fluid pH and ammonia concentrations did not differ between treatments (P ≥ 0.28). Acetate proportion in the ruminal fluid was reduced (P < 0.01), whereas rumen propionate, butyrate, and iso-valerate proportions were increased (P ≤ 0.05) in BAC heifers. No treatment differences were observed (P ≥ 0.14) for rumen fluid phyla. Relative abundances of the genera Bacteroides, Pedobacter, and Clostridium were less (P ≤ 0.04) in the rumen fluid of BAC heifers. Rumen liquid volume and dilution rate were not affected (P ≥ 0.63) by treatments. Heifers assigned to BAC had greater (P ≤ 0.04) effective ruminal degradability of DM and NDF, as well as ATTD of DM, CP, and NDF. Mean plasma glucose and insulin concentrations were greater (P ≤ 0.04) while mean blood urea-N concentration was less (P < 0.01) in BAC heifers. Plasma IGF-I concentration was greater (P = 0.04) in BAC heifers on day 21 (treatment × day; P = 0.04). Heifers receiving BAC had reduced (P = 0.05) abundance of the phylum Bacteroidetes, and reduced (P ≤ 0.05) abundance of the genera Pedobacter and Bacteroides in vaginal swabs. No treatment effects were observed (P ≥ 0.29) for phyla or genera relative abundances in uterine swabs. Supplementing a Bacillus-based probiotic improved nutrient utilization, rumen fermentation traits, and physiological responses of beef heifers consuming a forage-based diet, with effects on the reproductive tract limited to the vaginal microbiota.

Indexed as

BacillusGastrointestinal MicrobiomeNutrientsProbioticsRumenAnimal FeedAnimal Nutritional Physiological PhenomenaAnimalsCattleCross-Over StudiesDietDigestionFemaleFermentationNutrientsBacillus sppbeef heifermicrobiotanutrient degradationrumen fermentation

Identifiers

PMID41317362
PMCPMC12863943

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.