Effects of Thymol Supplementation on Goat Rumen Fermentation and Rumen Microbiota In Vitro
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study was performed to explore the predominant responses of rumen microbiota with thymol supplementation as well as effective dose of thymol on rumen fermentation. Thymol at different concentrations, i.e., 0, 100 mg/L, 200 mg/L, and 400 mg/L (four groups × five replications) was applied for 24 h of fermentation in a rumen fluid incubation system. Illumina MiSeq sequencing was applied to investigate the ruminal microbes in addition to the examination of rumen fermentation. Thymol doses reached 200 mg/L and significantly decreased (p < 0.05) total gas production (TGP) and methane production; the production of total volatile fatty acids (VFA), propionate, and ammonia nitrogen, and the digestibility of dry matter and organic matter were apparently decreased (p < 0.05) when the thymol dose reached 400 mg/L. A thymol dose of 200 mg/L significantly affected (p < 0.05) the relative abundance of 14 genera of bacteria, three species of archaea, and two genera of protozoa. Network analysis showed that bacteria, archaea, and protozoa significantly correlated with methane production and VFA production. This study indicates an optimal dose of thymol at 200 mg/L to facilitate rumen fermentation, the critical roles of bacteria in rumen fermentation, and their interactions with the archaea and protozoa.
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".