ArticleJournal of animal science2026
Effect of Camelina sativa seeds on rumen microbiota and fermentation in dairy sheep.
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. 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study investigated the effect of three levels of Camelina sativa seeds on ewes' diet on rumen microbiota using 16S rRNA gene amplicon sequencing and biochemical assays, focusing on rumen fermentation parameters and carbohydrates, proteins, and fats metabolism. Forty-eight dairy ewes were assigned to four homogeneous groups based on the inclusion level of C. sativa seeds in the diet (0, 28, 51.3, and 74.6 g/kg DM; Control, CS6, CS11, and CS16, respectively). Rumen digesta were collected on the 60th day of the trial using an esophageal tube. Rumen fluid was analyzed for volatile fatty acids (VFAs) concentration and rumen enzymatic activity. In addition, rumen microbiota was characterized in both fluid and solid fractions. The acetic and propionic acid concentrations were higher (P < 0.001) in CS11 compared with Control and CS6. Iso-butyric, butyric, iso-valeric, valeric acid, and total VFAs concentrations were higher (P < 0.05) in CS11 than in Control. The acetic: propionic ratio was higher (P = 0.003) in Control than in CS11 and CS16. Amylase activity was lower (P < 0.001) in CS6. In rumen fluid, CS11 and CS16 had a lower -biodiversity than the Control, while composition also differed (P ≤ 0.05). Regarding the most notable results of the taxa relative abundance, as compared with CS11 and CS16, Ruminobacter and Succinimonas relative abundances were lower (P < 0.05) in CS6, while Fibrobacter, Methanobrevibacter, Saccharofermentans, and Lachnospiraceae ND3007 group relative abundances were higher (P < 0.05). Ruminococcus was higher (P < 0.001) in CS6 than in Control. Fibrobacter was higher (P < 0.05) in the Control than in CS16. Butyrivibrio and Pseudobutyrivibrio were higher (P < 0.001) in CS11 compared with Control and CS6. Selenomonas -relative abundance was higher (P < 0.001) in CS16 than in Control and CS6. Higher inclusion levels were associated with reduced relative abundance of fibrolytic taxa and increased abundance of microbial groups linked to carbohydrate fermentation and -fatty acid biohydrogenation, with responses differing between rumen fluid and solid fractions. The lower-fat inclusion of C. sativa seeds could be associated with a relative enrichment of fibrolytic bacteria, potentially linked to greater phenolic bioavailabi-lity, whereas higher inclusion levels are associated with shifts toward amylolytic and propionate-associated taxa.
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.