Red osier dogwood extract vs. trimethoprim-sulfadiazine (Part 2). Pharmacodynamic effects on ileal and cecal microbiota of broiler chickens challenged orally with Salmonella Enteritidis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With the subsisting restrictions on the use of antibiotics in poultry production, the use of plant extracts has shown some promising antimicrobial capacity similar to antibiotics; however, such capacity is largely dependent on their total polyphenol concentration and profile. Given the emerging antimicrobial potential of red osier dogwood (ROD) extract, the study aimed to investigate the pharmacodynamic effect of ROD extract on the ileal and cecal microbiota of broiler chickens challenged orally with Salmonella Enteritidis (SE). A 21 d 4 × 2 factorial experiment was conducted based on 2 main factors, including diets and SE challenge. A total of 384 one-day-old mixed-sex Cobb-500 broiler chicks were randomly allotted to 4 dietary treatments; Negative control (NC), NC + 0.075 mg trimethoprim-sulfadiazine (TMP/SDZ)/kg of diet, and NC containing either 0.3 or 0.5% ROD extract. On d 1, half of the birds were orally challenged with 0.5 mL of phosphate-buffered saline (Noninfected group) and the remaining half with 0.5 mL of 3.1 × 105 CFU/mL SE (Infected group). Dietary treatments were randomly assigned to 8 replicate cages at 6 birds/cage. On d 21, 10 birds/treatment were euthanized and eviscerated to collect ileal and cecal digesta for gut microbiota analysis. The ileal and cecal microbiota was dominated by phyla Firmicutes, Proteobacteria, and Actinobacteriota. The SE infection decreased (P < 0.05) the relative abundance of Proteobacteria and Actinobacteriota in the ileum and ceca, respectively, however, it increased (P < 0.05) Proteobacteria in the ceca. Both 0.3 and 0.5% ROD extracts (P < 0.05) depressed the relative abundance of Actinobacteriota in the ileum but marginally improved (P < 0.05) it in the ceca compared to the TMP/SDZ treatment. Dietary TMP/SDZ increased (P < 0.05) genus Bifidobacterium at the ileal and cecal segments compared to other treatments. Dietary 0.3 and 0.5% marginally improved (P < 0.05) Bifidobacterium in the ceca and depressed (P < 0.05) Weissella and was comparably similar to TMP/SDZ in the ileum. Regardless of the dietary treatments and SE infection, alpha diversity differed (P < 0.05) between ileal and cecal microbiota. Beta diversity was distinct (P < 0.05) in both ileal and cecal digesta along the SE infection model. Conclusively, both ROD extract levels yielded a pharmacodynamic effect similar to antibiotics on ileal and cecal microbiota.
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) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 | 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".