Screening of the equine intestinal microflora for potential probiotic organisms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
REASONS FOR PERFORMING STUDY: Probiotics have not been demonstrated to provide any beneficial health effects in horses, possibly because of improper selection of probiotic organisms. This study was designed to identify lactic acid bacteria of equine origin with predetermined beneficial properties which might make them useful as therapeutic probiotics. HYPOTHESIS: A small percentage of lactic acid bacteria that are native to the intestinal tract of horses possess properties that may be useful in the treatment and/or prevention of gastrointestinal disease in horses. METHODS: Faecal samples were collected from healthy mature horses and foals. Lactic acid bacteria were isolated and tested for the ability to grow in acid and bile environments, aerotolerance and in vitro inhibition of enteropathogens. One isolate that possessed these properties was administered orally to healthy mature horses and foals and gastrointestinal survival was assessed. RESULTS: Of the 47 tested organisms, 18 were deemed to be adequately acid- and bile-tolerant. All were aerotolerant. Four organisms markedly inhibited Salmonella spp. One isolate, Lactobacillus pentosus WE7, was subjectively superior and chosen for further study. It was also inhibitory against E. coli, moderately inhibitory against S. zooepidemicus and C. difficile and mildly inhibitory against C. perfringens. After oral administration, this isolate was recovered from the faeces of 8/9 (89%) foals and 7/8 (87.5%) mature horses. CONCLUSIONS: Lactobacillus pentosus WE7 possesses in vitro and in vivo properties that may be useful for the prevention and treatment of enteric disease in horses. POTENTIAL RELEVANCE: The beneficial in vitro and in vivo properties that L. pentosus WE7 possesses indicate that randomised, blinded, placebo-controlled efficacy studies are warranted.
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 | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".