ArticleAnimal microbiome2026
Host genome regulation of the porcine gut microbiota and its impact on feed conversion efficiency.
Article in Animal microbiome, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aims to elucidate the regulatory mechanisms of host genetics on the porcine gut microbiota and their subsequent impact on the feed conversion ratio (FCR). While initial genome-wide association studies (GWAS) did not identify significant SNPs directly associated with FCR, we investigated the gut microbiota as a potential intermediate phenotype influencing feed efficiency. Nonmetric multidimensional scaling (NMDS) based on Bray–Curtis distances demonstrated a distinct separation in microbial community structure between the high-feed conversion ratio (HFCR) and low-feed conversion ratio (LFCR) groups (stress = 0.19), suggesting a link between FCR and gut microbial composition. Furthermore, a significant, albeit weak, negative correlation was observed between the genomic relatedness matrices and microbial Bray‒Curtis dissimilarity (r = −0.0143, p = 0.0031), indicating host genetic control over the microbiome. Microbiome genome-wide association study (mGWAS) identified 117 significant SNPs associated with 28 microbial taxa. Functional annotation highlighted eight candidate genes (DCY8, PATJ, PTPN2, FTO, SLC13A1, ADAM28, MGST1, and PTGS2) involved in the regulation of taxa, including Campylobacter, Faecalibacterium, Streptococcus, Succinivibrio, Treponema, Turicibacter, uncultured Erysipelotrichales, and uncultured Peptococcaceae 2. Collectively, these findings establish that the gut microbiota is a heritable trait influenced by the host genome, providing novel targets for breeding strategies designed to optimize microbial composition for improved feed efficiency.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.