ArticleBMC microbiology2026
Dietary fiber source-dependent modulation of pregnant sow fecal microbiota, gas profiles, and short-chain fatty acids in vitro.
Article in BMC microbiology, 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundGrowing evidence indicates that dietary fiber (DF) modulates gut microbiota and microbial fermentation metabolites, but the dynamic fermentation outcomes of different DF sources remain difficult to monitor directly under physiological conditions. This study used an in vitro batch fermentation model inoculated with pregnant sow fecal microbiota to compare the effects of a fiber-free control (CON), commercial concentrated fiber (CCF), beet pulp (BP), and alfalfa meal (AM) on microbial composition, gas concentration profiles, and short-chain fatty acid (SCFA) concentrations at 8, 12, 24, and 36 h.
resultsDifferent fiber substrates generated distinct fermentation profiles. CO₂ was the predominant gas throughout fermentation, whereas H₂ showed clearer substrate-dependent differences. AM generally resulted in higher total measured gas concentration, H₂ concentration, and total SCFA concentration than the other treatments. 16 S rRNA sequencing showed that different fiber substrates shaped the overall fecal microbial community structure, with selected genus-level taxa, including Lactobacillus, norank_f__Muribaculaceae, Prevotellaceae_NK3B31_group, Holdemanella, and Fusobacterium, exhibiting substrate-associated variation patterns. Correlation analysis further linked H₂ with SCFAs and selected fermentation-associated taxa. PICRUSt2 prediction suggested that AM fermentation was associated with differences in predicted microbial functional potential.
conclusionsThese findings indicate that different DF sources generate substrate-specific fecal microbial fermentation patterns in vitro. Among the tested substrates, AM produced a stronger SCFA- and H₂-associated fermentation response and was linked with selected microbial response patterns. Integrated correlation analysis suggested microbiota-associated co-variation between H₂ and SCFAs during DF fermentation, which requires further validation.
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.