Cited by 271Animal Nutrition and PhysiologyGut microbiota and healthVeterinary medicine and infectious diseases

Impact of dietary protein on microbiota composition and activity in the gastrointestinal tract of piglets in relation to gut health: a review

Open access
Rist, V.T.S., Weiss, E., Eklund, M., Mosenthin, R.·2013·Animal

Abstract

In pigs, the microbial ecosystem of the gastrointestinal tract (GIT) is influenced by various factors; however, variations in diet composition have been identified as one of the most important determinants. Marked changes in fermentation activities and microbial ecology may occur when altering the diet, for example, from milk to solid feed during weaning. In that way, access of pathogens to the disturbed ecosystem is alleviated, leading to infectious diseases and diarrhea. Thus, there is increasing interest in improving intestinal health by use of dietary ingredients suitable to beneficially affect the microbial composition and activity. For example, fermentable carbohydrates have been shown to promote growth of beneficial Lactobacillus species and bifidobacteria, thereby enhancing colonization resistance against potential pathogens or production of short-chain fatty acids, which can be used as energy source for epithelial cells. On the other hand, fermentation of protein results in the production of various potentially toxic products, such as amines and NH3, and is often associated with growth of potential pathogens. In that way, excessive protein intake has been shown to stimulate the growth of potentially pathogenic species such as Clostridium perfringens, and to reduce fecal counts of beneficial bifidobacteria. Therefore, it seems to be a promising approach to support growth and metabolic activity of the beneficial microbiota by developing suitable feeding strategies. For example, a reduction of dietary CP content and, at the same time, dietary supplementation with fermentable carbohydrates have proven to successfully suppress protein fermentation. In addition, the intestinal microbiota seems to be sensible to variations in dietary protein source, such as the use of highly digestible protein sources may reduce growth of protein-fermenting and potentially pathogenic species. The objective of the present review is to assess the impact of dietary protein on microbiota composition and activity in the GIT of piglets. Attention will be given to studies designed to determine the effect of variations in total protein supply, protein source and supplementation of fermentable carbohydrates to the diet on composition and metabolic activity of the intestinal microbiota.

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/s1751731113000062

Cites

83 of 83 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Excessive fermentation of dietary protein in the GI tract is generally considered detrimental due to the production of toxic by-products such as amines, phenols, indoles, thiols, and ammonia.

    “Excessive fermentation of dietary protein in the GI tract is generally considered detrimental given the production of toxic by-products such as amines, phenols, indoles, thiols, and ammonia [182, 183].”

    From The athletic gut microbiota (2020) · cites this paper as [183]

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 85 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Conway PL 1994. Function and regulation of the gastrointestinal microbiota of the pig. In Proceedings of the VI International Symposium on Digestive Physiology in Pigs (ed. WB Souffrant and HEAAP Hagemeister), pp. 231-240.
  2. Kelly D and King TP 2001. Luminal bacteria: regulation of gut function and immunity. In Gut environment of pigs (ed. A Piva, KE Bach Knudsen and JE Lindberg), pp. 113-131. Nottingham University Press, Nottingham, UK.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Rist, V. T. S., Weiss, E., Eklund, M., & Mosenthin, R.
Affiliations
University of Hohenheim (DE)
Corresponding author
Mosenthin, R.
Venue
Animal
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2013
Volume
7
Issue
7
Pages
1067-1078
ISSN
1751-7311 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2092431346
Cited by
269
References
85
Citations by year
2026: 18 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 26 · 2022: 24 · 2021: 41 · 2020: 35 · 2019: 19 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 24 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 2
FWCI
25.36
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • animal (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Animal Science and Zoology › Animal Nutrition and Physiology
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Gut microbiota and health
  • Health Sciences › Veterinary › Small Animals › Veterinary medicine and infectious diseases
Keywords
dietary protein, gut microbiota, piglets, gut health, protein fermentation, fermentable carbohydrates, Lactobacillus, Bifidobacterium, Clostridium perfringens, short-chain fatty acids, ammonia, weaning, protein sources, dietary supplementation, diarrhea, colonization resistance
MeSH terms
Animals, Animal Husbandry, Bacteria, Dietary Carbohydrates, Dietary Proteins, Fermentation, Sus scrofa, Gastrointestinal Tract, Metagenome

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