Intestinal microbiome profiles in broiler chickens raised without antibiotics exhibit altered microbiome dynamics relative to conventionally raised chickens
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present study was undertaken to profile and compare the cecal microbial communities in conventionally (CONV) grown and raised without antibiotics (RWA) broiler chickens. Three hundred chickens were collected from five CONV and five RWA chicken farms on days 10, 24, and 35 of age. Microbial genomic DNA was extracted from cecal contents, and the V4-V5 hypervariable regions of the 16S rRNA gene were amplified and sequenced. Analysis of 16S rRNA sequence data indicated significant differences in the cecal microbial diversity and composition between CONV and RWA chickens on days 10, 24, and 35 days of age. On days 10 and 24, CONV chickens had higher richness and diversity of the cecal microbiome relative to RWA chickens. However, on day 35, this pattern reversed such that RWA chickens had higher richness and diversity of the cecal microbiome than the CONV groups. On days 10 and 24, the microbiomes of both CONV and RWA chickens were dominated by members of the phylum Firmicutes. On day 35, while Firmicutes remained dominant in the RWA chickens, the microbiome of CONV chickens exhibited am abundance of Bacteroidetes. The cecal microbiome of CONV chickens was enriched with the genus Faecalibacterium, Pseudoflavonifractor, unclassified Clostridium_IV, Bacteroides, Alistipes, and Butyricimonas, whereas the cecal microbiome of RWA chickens was enriched with genus Anaerofilum, Butyricicoccu, Clostridium_XlVb and unclassified Lachnospiraceae. Overall, the cecal microbiome richness, diversity, and composition were greatly influenced by the management program applied in these farms. These findings provide a foundation for further research on tailoring feed formulation or developing a consortium to modify the gut microbiome composition of RWA chickens.
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) | 0.000 | 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".