Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42351266›Full record

ArticleMicrobiome2026

Differential rumen and hindgut microbiome and metabolome in Holstein female calves with divergent feed efficiency.

Tianyu Chen, Jianxin Xiao, Shangru Li, Rong Peng, Yiming Xu, Yimin Zhuang, Xinjie Zhao, Mo Sha, Jingjun Wang, Jiaying Ma and 6 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in 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.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

16 authors.

Tianyu Chen *State Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition and Feeding, International Calf and Heifer Organization, College of Animal Science and Technology, China Agricultural University, Beijing, 100193, China.
Jianxin Xiao *State Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition and Feeding, International Calf and Heifer Organization, College of Animal Science and Technology, China Agricultural University, Beijing, 100193, China.
Shangru Li *State Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition and Feeding, International Calf and Heifer Organization, College of Animal Science and Technology, China Agricultural University, Beijing, 100193, China.
Rong PengState Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition and Feeding, International Calf and Heifer Organization, College of Animal Science and Technology, China Agricultural University, Beijing, 100193, China.
Yiming XuState Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition and Feeding, International Calf and Heifer Organization, College of Animal Science and Technology, China Agricultural University, Beijing, 100193, China.
Yimin ZhuangState Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition and Feeding, International Calf and Heifer Organization, College of Animal Science and Technology, China Agricultural University, Beijing, 100193, China.
Xinjie ZhaoState Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition and Feeding, International Calf and Heifer Organization, College of Animal Science and Technology, China Agricultural University, Beijing, 100193, China.
Mo ShaState Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition and Feeding, International Calf and Heifer Organization, College of Animal Science and Technology, China Agricultural University, Beijing, 100193, China.
Jingjun WangState Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition and Feeding, International Calf and Heifer Organization, College of Animal Science and Technology, China Agricultural University, Beijing, 100193, China.
Jiaying MaState Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition and Feeding, International Calf and Heifer Organization, College of Animal Science and Technology, China Agricultural University, Beijing, 100193, China.
Wei WangState Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition and Feeding, International Calf and Heifer Organization, College of Animal Science and Technology, China Agricultural University, Beijing, 100193, China.
Jian GaoState Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition and Feeding, International Calf and Heifer Organization, College of Animal Science and Technology, China Agricultural University, Beijing, 100193, China.
Mei MaState Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition and Feeding, International Calf and Heifer Organization, College of Animal Science and Technology, China Agricultural University, Beijing, 100193, China.
Shengli LiState Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition and Feeding, International Calf and Heifer Organization, College of Animal Science and Technology, China Agricultural University, Beijing, 100193, China.
Zhijun CaoState Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition and Feeding, International Calf and Heifer Organization, College of Animal Science and Technology, China Agricultural University, Beijing, 100193, China.
Shuai LiuState Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition and Feeding, International Calf and Heifer Organization, College of Animal Science and Technology, China Agricultural University, Beijing, 100193, China. liushuaicau@cau.edu.cn.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSignificant environmental problems have challenged animal agriculture, improving feed efficiency in animals has become a vital research direction for sustainable agriculture. Bacteria play a critical role in the feed efficiency of animals. However, our current understanding of bacteria communities in the gastrointestinal tract of high-feed efficiency animals and their metabolic mechanisms remains unclear.

resultsTwenty Holstein female calves were used in this multi-omics study that integrated metagenomic and metabolomic analyses of 20 Holstein female calves to investigate feed efficiency, as measured by residual feed intake (RFI). From an initial cohort of 84 calves, the 10 with the highest RFI (HRFI, low efficiency) and the 10 with the lowest RFI (LRFI, high efficiency) were selected at 84 days of age. Rumen fluid, feces, and serum samples from these calves were collected for subsequent analyses. We found that LRFI calves harbored rumen and fecal microbiomes with significantly different community structures and co-occurrence networks compared to HRFI calves. Multi-omics integration identified robust microbial and metabolite biomarkers discriminating RFI groups. These microbiomes were functionally linked to differential nutrient utilization, LRFI calves were characterized by enhanced starch and protein digestibility coupled with propionate-oriented fermentation, associated with key species like Erysipelotrichaceae_bacterium and Hungatella_sp. Conversely, HRFI calves showed higher fat digestibility and acetate production. Notably, serum glutamate was enriched in LRFI calves despite lower intake, correlating with potential microbial metabolites (ribitol, taurine). Subsequent validation confirmed that glutamate supplementation in mice improved nitrogen metabolism and gut barrier function.

conclusionsIn summary, this multi-omics study reveals that high feed efficiency in calves is associated with distinct microbial ecosystems characterized by functions such as starch degradation and propionate production, where glutamate metabolism serves as a central node. Video Abstract.

Indexed as

BacteriaGastrointestinal MicrobiomeMetabolomeRumenAnimal FeedAnimalsCattleFecesFemaleFermentationMetabolomicsMetagenomicsMultiomicsBacteriaDigestibilityFeed efficiencyMetabolomeRuminants

Identifiers

PMID42351266
PMCPMC13587403

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.