The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Percent G+C Profiling Accurately Reveals Diet-Related Differences in the Gastrointestinal Microbial Community of Broiler Chickens
Open accessAbstract
Broiler chickens from eight commercial farms in Southern Finland were analyzed for the structure of their gastrointestinal microbial community by a nonselective DNA-based method, percent G+C-based profiling. The bacteriological impact of the feed source and in-farm whole-wheat amendment of the diet was assessed by percent G+C profiling. Also, a phylogenetic 16S rRNA gene (rDNA)-based study was carried out to aid in interpretation of the percent G+C profiles. This survey showed that most of the 16S rDNA sequences found could not be assigned to any previously known bacterial genus or they represented an unknown species of one of the taxonomically heterogeneous genera, such as Ruminococcus or Clostridium . The data from bacterial community profiling were analyzed by t -test, multiple linear regression, and principal-component statistical approaches. The percent G+C profiling method with appropriate statistical analyses detected microbial community differences smaller than 10% within each 5% increment of the percent G+C profiles. Diet turned out to be the strongest determinant of the cecal bacterial community structure. Both the source of feed and local feed amendment changed the bacteriological profile significantly, whereas profiles of individual farms with identical feed regimens hardly differed from each other. This suggests that the management of typical Finnish farms is relatively uniform or that hygiene on the farm, in fact, has little impact on the structure of the cecal bacterial community. Therefore, feed compounders should have a significant role in the modulation of gut microflora and consequently in prevention of gastrointestinal disorders in farm animals.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Stewart, C. S., Flint, H. J., & Bryant, M. P. (1997) · The Rumen Microbial Ecosystem · doi:10.1007/978-94-009-1453-7_2 · Cited by 772
Cited by
Björklund, M., Ouwehand, A. C., Forssten, S. D., Nikkilä, J., Tiihonen, K., Rautonen, N., & Lahtinen, S. J. (2012) · AGE · doi:10.1007/s11357-011-9294-5 · Cited by 67
Lesniewska, V., Rowland, I., Laerke, H. N., Grant, G., & Naughton, P. J. (2006) · Experimental Physiology · doi:10.1113/expphysiol.2005.031708 · Cited by 55
Metadata
- Authors
- Apajalahti, J. H. A., Kettunen, A., Bedford, M. R., & Holben, W. E.
- Venue
- Applied and Environmental Microbiology
- Publisher
- American Society for Microbiology
- Published
- 2001-12
- Volume
- 67
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- 5656-5667
- ISSN
- 0099-2240 (ISSN-L)
- 1098-5336
- OpenAlex
- W2157872440
- Cited by
- 187
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 14.31
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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: Percent G+C Profiling Accurately Reveals Diet-Related Differences in the Gastrointestinal Microbial Community of Broiler Chickens. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1128/aem.67.12.5656-5667.2001
- The paper
- Apajalahti, J. H. A., Kettunen, A., Bedford, M. R., & Holben, W. E. (2001). Percent G+C Profiling Accurately Reveals Diet-Related Differences in the Gastrointestinal Microbial Community of Broiler Chickens. Applied and Environmental Microbiology. https://doi.org/10.1128/aem.67.12.5656-5667.2001
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.