Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40685326›Full record

ArticleJournal of animal science2025

Effects of live Bacillus pumilus SG154 or a Lacticaseibacillus paracasei 327 postbiotic on apparent total tract nutrient digestibility and the immune function and fecal characteristics, metabolites, and microbiota of healthy adult dogs.

Jocelyn F Wren, Sofia M Wilson, Yifei Kang, Patrícia M Oba, John F Menton, Elena Vinay, Mathieu Millette, Melissa R Kelly, Kelly S Swanson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of animal science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Effects of Complementary Feed with Postbiotics Derived fromAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026
    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

9 authors.

Jocelyn F WrenDepartment of Animal Sciences, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL 61801USA.
Sofia M WilsonDepartment of Animal Sciences, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL 61801USA.ORCID 0009-0002-1789-3055
Yifei KangThe Carl R. Woese Institute for Genomic Biology, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL 61801, USA.
Patrícia M ObaDepartment of Animal Sciences, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL 61801USA.ORCID 0000-0003-2473-1791
John F MentonKerry Group, Beloit, WI 53511, USA.
Elena VinayKerry Group, Beloit, WI 53511, USA.
Mathieu MilletteKerry (Canada), Laval, Quebec H7V 4B3, Canada.
Melissa R KellyScience Made Simple, LLC, Winston Salem, NC 27101, USA.
Kelly S SwansonDepartment of Animal Sciences, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL 61801USA.ORCID 0000-0001-5518-3076

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Probiotics and postbiotics have the potential to shift the gut microbiota, support gastrointestinal health, and enhance immune function, but must be tested for safety and efficacy in the target host. The Bacillus and Lacticaseibacillus genera have been shown to positively influence microbial balance and enhance immune response and immune function in humans and livestock. The objective of this study was to determine the effects of live Bacillus pumilus SG154 or a Lacticaseibacillus paracasei 327 postbiotic on dietary apparent total tract digestibility and the hematology, serum metabolites, fecal characteristics, metabolites and microbiota, and skin and nasal microbiota of adult dogs. Twelve healthy adult English pointer dogs (age = 6.38 ± 2.75 yr; body weight = 23.98 ± 4.61 kg) were used in a replicated 3 × 3 Latin square design to test the following treatments administered via gelatin capsules: 1) placebo (control; 250 mg maltodextrin/day); 2) live B. pumilus [5 × 109 colony-forming units (CFU)/day]; 3) L. paracasei postbiotic (100 mg; derived from 2 × 109 CFU). Each experimental period was 28 d in length, including a 22-d adaptation phase, 5-d fecal collection phase, and 1 d for blood collection, nasal swabs, and skin swabs. Data were analyzed using the Mixed Model procedure of SAS, with P < 0.05 being significant and P < 0.10 being trends. Neither B. pumilus nor L. paracasei influenced nutrient digestibility, food intake, fecal output, or fecal characteristics. Based on 16S rRNA gene sequencing, the relative abundance of fecal Actinobacteriota tended to be higher (P < 0.10) and the relative abundance of fecal Collinsella was higher (P < 0.05) in dogs fed B. pumilus than those fed L. paracasei and controls. Treatments appeared to alter skin bacteria as well, with the relative abundance of skin Erysipelotrichaceae UCG-003 being higher (P < 0.05) in dogs fed L. paracasei than in dogs fed B. pumilus. Skin Ligilactobacillus relative abundance was lower (P < 0.05) in dogs fed B. pumilus than in controls. The relative abundance of skin Peptoclostridium was higher (P < 0.05) in dogs fed L. paracasei than in controls. Most hematology measures were within the reference ranges for adult dogs and unaffected by treatment. Overall, our results demonstrate that consumption of the B. pumilus SG154 and L. paracasei 327 tested are well-tolerated and does not influence nutrient digestibility or fecal characteristics.

Indexed as

Bacillus pumilusBacteriaDietary SupplementsDogsGastrointestinal MicrobiomeLacticaseibacillus paracaseiAnimalsBiodiversityFecesFemaleMalecanine healthcanine nutritioncompanion animalprobiotic

Identifiers

PMID40685326
PMCPMC12415552

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.