Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 269

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Probiotics, prebiotics and competitive exclusion for prophylaxis against bacterial disease

Callaway, T. R., Edrington, T. S., Anderson, R. C., Harvey, R. B., Genovese, K. J., Kennedy, C. N., Venn, D. W., Nisbet, D. J.·2008·Animal Health Research Reviews

Abstract

The microbial population of the intestinal tract is a complex natural resource that can be utilized in an effort to reduce the impact of pathogenic bacteria that affect animal production and efficiency, as well as the safety of food products. Strategies have been devised to reduce the populations of food-borne pathogenic bacteria in animals at the on-farm stage. Many of these techniques rely on harnessing the natural competitive nature of bacteria to eliminate pathogens that negatively impact animal production or food safety. Thus feed products that are classified as probiotics, prebiotics and competitive exclusion cultures have been utilized as pathogen reduction strategies in food animals with varying degrees of success. The efficacy of these products is often due to specific microbial ecological factors that alter the competitive pressures experienced by the microbial population of the gut. A few products have been shown to be effective under field conditions and many have shown indications of effectiveness under experimental conditions and as a result probiotic products are widely used in all animal species and nearly all production systems. This review explores the ecology behind the efficacy of these products against pathogens found in food animals, including those that enter the food chain and impact human consumers.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s1466252308001540

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 2 references

Cited by

See all 269

Metadata

Authors
Callaway, T. R., Edrington, T. S., Anderson, R. C., Harvey, R. B., Genovese, K. J., Kennedy, C. N., Venn, D. W., & Nisbet, D. J.
Venue
Animal Health Research Reviews
Published
2008-12
Volume
9
Issue
2
Pages
217-225
ISSN
  • 1466-2523 (ISSN-L)
  • 1475-2654
OpenAlex
W2168638243
Cited by
269
References
2
FWCI
13.29
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Probiotics, prebiotics and competitive exclusion for prophylaxis against bacterial disease. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1017/s1466252308001540
The paper
Callaway, T. R., Edrington, T. S., Anderson, R. C., Harvey, R. B., Genovese, K. J., Kennedy, C. N., Venn, D. W., & Nisbet, D. J. (2008). Probiotics, prebiotics and competitive exclusion for prophylaxis against bacterial disease. Animal Health Research Reviews. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1466252308001540

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.