ArticleEnvironmental microbiome2026
Identification of silage bacterial clusters and analysis of their microecological characteristics.
Article in Environmental microbiome, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEnterotypes refer to the different bacterial clusters in the gut microecosystem, which are closely related to host physiology, digestion, disease, and other phenotypes. However, whether there are clear clusters in the silage microecosystem, and the fermentation quality and characteristics of unique cluster silage remain unknown. To determine whether distinct bacterial clusters exist in the silage microecosystem and to characterize their fermentation properties, we analyzed the bacterial community composition and fermentation quality of 156 silage samples, and further explored their underlying microbial ecological features.
resultsWe confirmed three distinct clusters in the silage microbiome, which were named according to their dominant bacterial taxa: the E-cluster (characterized by a higher abundance of unclassified Enterobacteriaceae (UG)), the P-cluster (enriched with Pseudomonas and Janthinobacterium), and the L-cluster (dominated by Lactobacillus). These microbial clusters were closely associated with fermentation quality: the L-cluster exhibited superior silage quality compared to the E- and P-clusters. Meanwhile, the microbial functional profiles differed significantly among the three clusters of silage. Numerous pathways were significantly enriched in the P-cluster, such as the Biosynthesis of other secondary metabolites, etc. Moreover, bacterial co-occurrence networks of three clusters silage displayed cooperative interactions mainly, P-cluster silage network was more complex and tighter, E-cluster silage has more functional microbial units and more stable. Furthermore, the assembly of microbial communities in the three silage clusters was dominated by stochastic processes. Specifically, the E-cluster and L-cluster were governed by ecological drift, while dispersal limitation was more influential in the P-cluster.
conclusionsOverall, we found in our study that the silage microbiome can be divided into three clusters, and different clusters have significant differences in fermentation quality, microbial diversity and compositions, functional profiles, microbial network characteristics and community assembly mechanisms. These results could broaden our comprehension of the silage microbial ecology processes and also provide a scientific basis on which to develop a method to precisely regulate silage quality.
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.