Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33459998›Full record

ArticleProbiotics and antimicrobial proteins2021

Dietary Supplementation of Potential Probiotics Bacillus subtilis, Bacillus licheniformis, and Saccharomyces cerevisiae and Synbiotic Improves Growth Performance and Immune Responses by Modulation in Intestinal System in Broiler Chicks Challenged with Salmonella Typhimurium.

Kambiz Fazelnia, Jafar Fakhraei, Hossein Mansoori Yarahmadi, Kumarss Amini

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Probiotics and antimicrobial proteins, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed
4.9field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

25 citing papers in PubMed, 47 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Further Evaluation of 1,25(OH)Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. The combination of dietary active dry yeast andAnimal nutrition (Zhongguo xu mu shou yi xue hui) · 2025
    Article
  9. Single or Combined Supplementation ofVeterinary sciences · 2025
    Article
  10. The probioticInfection and immunity · 2025
    Article
  11. In Vitro Investigation of the Effects ofAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Frontiers in veterinary science · 2023
    Article
  17. DietaryFrontiers in microbiology · 2023
    Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Kambiz FazelniaDepartment of Animal Science, Arak Branch, Islamic Azad University, Arak, Iran.
Jafar FakhraeiDepartment of Animal Science, Arak Branch, Islamic Azad University, Arak, Iran. J-fakhraei@iau-arak.ac.ir.
Hossein Mansoori YarahmadiDepartment of Animal Science, Arak Branch, Islamic Azad University, Arak, Iran.
Kumarss AminiDepartment of Microbiology, Faculty of Basic Sciences, Saveh Branch, Islamic Azad University, Saveh, Iran.
Islamic Azad University, Arak · IRIslamic Azad University Saveh · IR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study evaluates the effects of probiotics and synbiotics on the performance, immune responses, and intestinal morphology, and the expression of immunity-related genes of broiler chicks challenged with Salmonella typhimurium. Three hundred and sixty broiler chicks were divided into six groups, including broiler chicks challenged and non-challenged with S. typhimurium and fed with probiotic, synbiotic, and basal diet without additive. Growth performance (food intake, daily gain, feed conversion ratio, and mortality), immune responses (antibody titer against sheep red blood cells, immunoglobulins G and M), intestinal morphology, lactic acid bacteria population, and the expression of immunity-related genes (interferon-γ, interleukins 6 and 12, and tumor necrosis factor-α) were investigated. The administration of S. typhimurium decreased growth performance (P = 0.0001), immune responses (P = 0.0001), intestinal morphology (P = 0.0001), lactic acid bacteria population (P = 0.0001), and the expression of immunity-related genes (P = 0.0001) of broiler chickens. However, broiler chicks fed with probiotic (P = 0.001) and synbiotic (P = 0.0001) showed better growth performance, immune responses, intestinal morphology, lactic acid bacteria population, and the expression of immunity-related genes in comparison with infected broiler chicks fed with basal diet lack of probiotic and synbiotic. Feeding probiotics (P = 0.001) and synbiotics (P = 0.0001) showed positive effects for challenged and non-challenged broiler chicks. In sum, feeding synbiotic and probiotic alleviated the negative effects of S. typhimurium on growth and immunity of broiler chicks. It can be suggested to apply synbiotic and probiotics as benefit additive against infectious challenges, such as S. typhimurium.

Indexed as

Bacillus licheniformisBacillus subtilisProbioticsSaccharomyces cerevisiaeSynbioticsAnimalsChickensImmunitySalmonella Infections, AnimalSalmonella typhimuriumBroiler chicksGrowthImmunityIntestinal systemSalmonella

Identifiers

PMID33459998
OpenAlexW3121190393

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.