ArticlePoultry science2026
Comparative efficacy of oral and cloacal administration of Lactobacillus probiotics and postbiotics against Campylobacter jejuni colonization in broiler chickens.
Article in Poultry science, 2026. 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.
- Investigation of the Immunomodulatory Effects of Combined Prebiotic, Probiotic, and Postbiotic Mixtures in Chicken Ileal Explant Cultures.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026Article
- Ligilactobacillus salivarius Lbs57 Exerted Antibacterial Activity and Modulated Cecal Microbiota to Reduce Foodborne Pathogen Campylobacter jejuni.Probiotics and antimicrobial proteins · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Campylobacter jejuni remains a major cause of foodborne illness worldwide, with poultry serving as the primary reservoir. In the absence of commercial vaccines or effective feed additives, probiotics and their byproducts (postbiotics) represent a promising and sustainable approach to reducing Campylobacter colonization in poultry. This study compared the efficacy of oral and cloacal administration of probiotic lactobacilli and their postbiotics in reducing Campylobacter colonization and modulating the cecal microbiome in broiler chickens. Day-old chicks were assigned to seven treatment groups that received either probiotics (live cells of four poultry-derived Lactobacillus strains: L. reuteri P43, L. acidophilus P42, L. animalis P38, and L. crispatus C25) or postbiotics (Lactobacillus supernatants) or their combination (whole cultures) orally or intracloacally, with a non-treated group serving as a control. Chickens were challenged with C. jejuni strain 81-176 at the second week of age, and cecal contents were collected at the fifth week for Campylobacter enumeration and microbiome profiling. The results revealed that both oral and cloacal administration of Lactobacillus cells significantly reduced Campylobacter cecal loads by 0.34 and 0.78 log₁₀, respectively, compared to the control. Significant differences in microbial richness and evenness were observed among treatment groups, with groups administered orally with probiotics, postbiotics, or their combination consistently showing higher alpha diversity indices than controls. NMDS ordination confirmed distinct community clustering among the treatment groups. Differential abundance analysis (MaAsLin2) further revealed that Ruminococcus was significantly enriched in the group receiving intracloacal postbiotic treatment, whereas the genus unclassified Firmicutes was more abundant in the group that received the combined probiotic-postbiotic treatment orally. Opportunistic genera, such as Escherichia-Shigella and Faecalicoccus, were significantly higher in the control group compared to all treated groups. Overall, while probiotics and postbiotics, whether given alone or together, modulated the gut microbial composition in Campylobacter-infected broilers, the administration of probiotic cells offered additional benefits by reducing Campylobacter colonization.
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.