MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4407291640 · doi:10.1093/jas/skaf038

Effects of <i>Bacillus subtilis</i> ATCC PTA-122264 on apparent total tract macronutrient digestibility and fecal characteristics, metabolites, and microbiota of healthy adult dogs

2025· article· en· W4407291640 on OpenAlexaff
Patrícia M Oba, Olivia R Swanson, Yifei Kang, Julio Mioto, John F Menton, Elena Vinay, Mathieu Millette, Melissa R. Kelly, Kelly S. Swanson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Animal Science · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiet and metabolism studies
Canadian institutionsSNC-Lavalin (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFecesBacillus subtilisBiologyMicrobiologyFood scienceAnimal scienceBacteria

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Gastrointestinal and stool quality issues are common in companion animals. In addition to dietary fibers and prebiotics, the consumption of live microorganisms may be used to support the gastrointestinal health of pets. Spore-forming Bacillus species are gaining interest due to their viability during processing, storage, and within the gastrointestinal tract. The objective of the current study was to determine the effects of B. subtilis ATCC PTA-122264 supplementation on dietary apparent total tract macronutrient digestibility and the fecal characteristics, metabolites, and microbiota of healthy adult dogs. Twelve healthy adult beagle dogs (6 ± 1.14 yr; 8.71 ± 0.91 kg body weight) were used in a replicated 3 × 3 Latin square design. Dogs were fed to maintain body weight and allotted to 1 of the 3 treatments each experimental period (n = 12/treatment): Control [kibble diet + placebo (1.25 g of maltodextrin)], Low [kibble diet + 1 × 109 colony-forming units (CFU)/d of B. subtilis], and High (kibble diet + 5 × 109 CFU/d of B. subtilis). Each experimental period was composed of a 22-d adaptation phase, 5-d fecal collection phase, and 1 d for blood collection. Fecal microbiota data were evaluated using QIIME2. All other data were analyzed using the Mixed Models procedure of SAS, with P < 0.05 being considered significant. B. subtilis supplementation tended to decrease (P < 0.10) apparent total tract dry matter, organic matter, and energy digestibilities but did not influence food or energy intake, fecal output, and apparent total tract protein or fat digestibilities. Most serum metabolites, hematology, fecal characteristics, and fecal bacterial alpha and beta diversity indices were not affected. Fecal dysbiosis index tended to be affected and fecal Streptococcus, Escherichia coli, and Blautia abundances were lower (P < 0.05) in dogs allotted to the Low treatment. These data suggest that daily supplementation of up to 5 × 109 CFU/d of B. subtilis ATCC PTA-122264 is safe and does not affect markers of general health and fecal characteristics of healthy dogs, warranting further exploration.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.266 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Animal Science→Same topicDiet and metabolism studies→French-language works237,207→