The effect of Pediococcus acidilactici on the gut microbiota and immune status of on-growing red tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: To assess Pediococcus acidilactici as a dietary supplement for on-growing red tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus). METHODS AND RESULTS: Tilapia were fed either a control diet or control diet supplemented with Ped. acidilactici at 10(7) CFU g(-1) for 32 days. Ped. acidilactici colonized the intestinal tract and significantly affected the intestinal microbial communities. PCR-DGGE revealed direct antagonism of gastric Ped. acidilactici with an endogenous uncultured bacterium during a period of reverting to nonsupplemented feeding. Light microscopy revealed that gut integrity and leucocyte levels were unaffected by Ped. acidilactici; however, blood leucocyte levels and serum lysozyme activity were elevated after 14-days' feeding. No significant improvements in growth performance were observed at the end of the trial (day 32), but survival was significantly higher in the probiotic group. CONCLUSIONS: The study demonstrates that oral supplementation of Ped. acidilactici modulates intestinal bacterial communities in on-growing red tilapia and also stimulates some aspects of the nonspecific immune response. SIGNIFICANCE AND IMPACT OF THE STUDY: To our knowledge this is the first study assessing the effects of probiotics on the gut microbiota of tilapia using culture-independent methods. Such methods are crucial to understand the mechanisms which underpin and mediate host benefits.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".