160 Effects of Bacillus Licheniformis PF9 on Growth, Nutrient Absorption, gut Barrier Integrity, Immunity, and Intestinal Microbiota of Weaned Piglets Challenged with Enterotoxigenic Escherichia Coli F4
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This study aimed to evaluate the effects of Bacillus licheniformis PF9 on growth performance and gut health of weaned piglets challenged with enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli (ETEC) F4. Thirty-two weaned piglets susceptible of ETEC F4 were randomly allocated to 4 treatments 1) NNC, basal diet and non-challenged; 2) NC, basal diet; 3) PC, basal diet + 80 mg·kg-1 of Avilamycin; and 4) PF9, basal diet + 109 cfu/kg of Bacillus licheniformis PF9. ETEC F4 decreased average daily gain and increased feed conversion ratio of the NC group. An increase was found in FCR of the PC group during the post-challenge period (P < 0.05). ETEC F4 induced the severity of diarrhea at 3-, 36- and 40-hours post-inoculum (hpi) in the NC group (P < 0.05). Bacillus licheniformis relieved diarrhea severity at 3 hpi (P < 0.05). ETEC F4 reduced the duodenal, jejunal and ileal villus height of the NC group. A decrease in duodenal villus height in the PC group (P < 0.05). ETEC F4 reduced the relative mRNA level of Na+-glucose cotransporter 1 in the NC group (P < 0.05). Compared to the NC and NNC groups, Bacillus licheniformis increased relative mRNA levels of Aminopeptidase N, Occludin, Zonula occludens-1, and SGLT1 (P < 0.05). Bacillus licheniformis increased the relative mRNA level of excitatory amino acid transporter 1 (P < 0.05). Bacillus licheniformis showed a lower relative abundance of Bacteroidetes in the colon than piglets from the NNC group (P < 0.05). The non-challenged group had a higher relative abundance of Firmicutes in the ileum than the challenged piglets, meanwhile, a lower relative abundance of Proteobacteria in the ileum and colon in the NC group (P < 0.05). This study provides evidence that Bacillus licheniformis can be a potential antibiotics alternative to improve the gut health of piglets.
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) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".