Evidence Hub

A novel microbiome metabolic modulator improves the growth performance of broiler chickens in multiple trials and modulates targeted energy and amino acid metabolic pathways in the cecal metagenome

Walsh MC, Jacquier V, Schyns G, Claypool J, Tamburini I, Blokker B, Geremia JM

Poultry science, 2021

18 citations

Abstract

A meta-analysis of 19 floor-pen trials (579 replicate pen observations) in diverse geographies, basal diets, seasons, and medication programs was carried out to evaluate the effects of 2 precision glycan microbiome metabolic modulators (MMM1 and MMM2) on the performance of broiler chickens. In each trial, negative-control (NC) diets were compared with either MMM1 (14 trials) or MMM2 (8 trials), supplemented at an intended dose of 500 g/MT from hatch to 31 to 42 d. A dose response of MMM2 was evaluated in 8 trials at doses of 100, 250, 500, and 1,000 g/MT, not all present in each trial. Linear mixed-effect models were constructed for the final BW, cumulative feed intake, feed conversion ratio (FCR) corrected by mortality and BW (cFCR), and mortality, with Treatment as the fixed effect, nested random effects of Trial and Block, and adjustments for heterogeneity of variances. A significance level of P < 0.05 was used. In one of the studies, cecal content samples were collected at 42 d for analysis of microbiome gene abundance. Microbiome metabolic modulator 2 exhibited a reduction of the cFCR of 0.06 g feed/g BW gain compared with the NC and 0.03 g feed/g BW gain compared with MMM1, whereas MMM1 reduced the cFCR by 0.03 g feed/g BW gain compared with NC. Both MMM1 and MMM2 increased the final BW compared with the NC by 43 and 48 g/bird, respectively, with no difference among them. Compared with NC, feed intake was increased by MMM1 (+51 g/bird) and reduced by MMM2 (-74 g/bird).…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in animal, not in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free