饲养密度对琅琊鸡生产性能和短链脂肪酸含量及盲肠微生物差异功能的影响

doi:10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2025.17.014

Abstract

Abstract:

【Objective】This experiment aimed to investigate the differences in cecal microbiota diversity, short-chain fatty acids (SCFAs), and microbial functional profiles of Langya hens under identical feeding conditions but varying stocking densities, thereby providing a theoretical basis for the healthy breeding of Langya chickens.【Method】A single-factor experimental design was employed. A total of 450 20-week-old Langya hens with similar body weights (P>0. 05) were selected and divided into three treatments: low stocking density (540 cm²/hen, L), medium stocking density (450 cm²/hen, I), and high stocking density (360cm²/hen, H). Each treatment included 15 replicates with 10 birds per replicate. At 23 weeks (A) and 43 weeks (B) of age, three birds per group were randomly selected for body weight measurement and euthanasia to collect cecal content. The Illumina MiSeq platform was used to analyze cecal microbiota diversity, and gas chromatography was applied to quantify SCFA concentrations.【Result】(1) At the end of the 23rd week, the daily weight gain, average egg weight, daily egg production and feed-to-egg ratio in the AL group were significantly higher than those in the AH group (P<0.05), the egg production rate in the AL group was significantly higher than that in the AI group (P<0.05), the egg production rate in the AI group was significantly higher than that in the AH group (P<0.05), and the egg production rate in the AL group was highly significant higher than that of the AH group (P<0.01); at the end of the 43rd week, the body weight, daily weight gain, average egg weight, daily egg production and feed-to-egg ratio in the BL group were significantly higher than those in the BH group (P<0.05), and the egg production rate in the BL group was significantly higher than those of the BI group (P<0.05), and the egg production rate of the BI group was significantly higher than those in the BH group (P<0.05). weight, daily weight gain, average egg weight, daily egg production and feed-to-egg ratio in the BL group were significantly higher than that in the BH group (P<0.05), the egg production rate was significantly higher in the BL group than in the BI group (P<0.05), the egg production rate in the BI group was significantly higher than that in the BH group (P<0.05), and the egg production rate in the BL group was highly significant than that in the BH group (P<0.01). (2) At the phylum level, Bacteroidota in group AH was significantly higher than that in group AI (P<0. 05), while Firmicutes in group BH was significantly higher than that in the BI and BL groups (P<0. 05). At the genus level, Prevotellaceae_UCG-003 in group AL was significantly higher than in AH (P<0. 05) and highly significantly higher than that in AI (P<0. 01). Alloprevotella in AL was significantly higher than in AI (P<0. 05). In group BH, Blautia, Christensenellaceae_R-7_group, UCG-002, and Ruminococcus were significantly higher than that in BL group (P<0. 05). Oscillibacter and Intestinimonas in BI group were significantly higher than that in BL (P<0. 05). (3) At the end of 23 weeks, acetic acid, propionic acid, isobutyric acid, butyric acid and valeric acid in AL group and AI group were significantly higher than those in AH group (P<0.05). At the end of 43 weeks, propionic acid in BI and BH group was significantly higher than that in BL groups (P<0.05). Isobutyric acid and valeric acid in BI group were significantly higher than those in BL group (P<0.05). (4) Comparative analysis using KEGG metabolic pathways and 16S functional prediction revealed that the low-density group exhibited significant enrichment in pathways related to energy metabolism, cell growth, endocrine system, protein folding/processing, and longevity regulation compared to medium-and high-density groups.【Conclusion】Different stocking densities affected the production performance, cecal flora diversity and structure composition of Langya chickens during the 20-43 weekend. In the low stocking density, the production performance of Langya chickens was improved, the cecal flora diversity and the content of SCFAs in fermentation products were increased, and the pathways of energy metabolism, cell growth, endocrine system, protein folding chicken related processing and longevity regulation in KEGG pathway were significantly enriched.

Key words: Langya chicken, weight, cecal flora, diversity, short-chainfatty acids

LI XueFeng, WANG Hui, ZHANG NingBo, JIN TaiHua, ZHANG ShuEr, ZHENG QuanSheng, TAO JiaShu, LI QingKe, LÜ ShenJin, LI YongZhu. Prediction and Analysis of Feeding Density on Production Performance, Cecal Flora Diversity, Short-Chain Fatty Acid Content and Microbial Differential Function of Langya Chickens[J].Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2025, 58(17): 3544-3560.

Figures/Tables 10

Table 1

Table 2

Table 3

Fig. 1

Fig. 2

Fig. 3

Fig. 4

Table 4

Fig. 5

Fig. 6

References 42

[1]	BILAL R M, HASSAN F U, FARAG M R, ALI NASIR T, RAGNI M, MAHGOUB H A M, ALAGAWANY M. Thermal stress and high stocking densities in poultry farms: Potential effects and mitigation strategies. Journal of Thermal Biology, 2021, 99: 102944.
[2]	袁建敏. 肉禽饲养密度应激及营养调控研究进展. 中国家禽, 2017, 39(17): 1-5.
	YUAN J M. Research progress on feeding density stress and nutritional regulation of meat birds. China Poultry, 2017, 39(17): 1-5. (in Chinese)
[3]	王永康, 徐新红. 未来蛋鸡笼养的发展趋势和动物福利问题. 中国家禽, 2002, 24(20): 1-4.
	WANG Y K, XU X H. Development trend and animal wealth of future cage layers. China Poultry, 2002, 24(20): 1-4. (in Chinese)
[4]	于江明, 王秋菊, 刘勃麟, 宁博林, 王龙, 赵乾雨, 刘胜军, 全佳慧. 不同饲养密度对笼养蛋鸡十二指肠肠道菌群的影响. 动物营养学报, 2016, 28(3): 899-907.
	YU J M, WANG Q J, LIU B L, NING B L, WANG L, ZHAO Q Y, LIU S J, QUAN J H. Effects of different stocking density on microbial flora of duodenum for caged layer. Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2016, 28(3): 899-907. (in Chinese)
[5]	SVIHUS B, SVIHUS C, CHOCT M, CHOCT C, CLASSEN H L, CLASSEN C L. Function and nutritional roles of the avian caeca: A review. World’s Poultry Science Journal, 2013, 69(2): 249-264.
[6]	TURNBAUGH P J, LEY R E, MAHOWALD M A, MAGRINI V, MARDIS E R, GORDON J I. An obesity-associated gut microbiome with increased capacity for energy harvest. Nature, 2006, 444(7122): 1027-1031.
[7]	CANI P D, VAN HUL M. Gut microbiota in overweight and obesity: Crosstalk with adipose tissue. Nature Reviews Gastroenterology & Hepatology, 2024, 21(3): 164-183.
[8]	国家市场监督管理总局, 中国国家标准化管理委员会. 饲料中钙的测定: GB/T 6436—2018[S]. 北京: 中国标准出版社, 2018.
	State Administration of Market Regulation, Standardization Administration of the People’s Republic of China. Determination of calcium in feeds: GB/T 6436—2018[S]. Beijing: Standards Press of China, 2018. (in Chinese)
[9]	国家市场监督管理总局, 国家标准化管理委员会. 饲料中总磷的测定分光光度法: GB/T 6437—2018[S]. 北京: 中国标准出版社, 2018.
	State Administration of Market Regulation, Standardization Administration of the People’s Republic of China. Determination of phosphorus in feeds—Spectrophotometry: GB/T 6437—2018[S]. Beijing: Standards Press of China, 2018. (in Chinese)
[10]	国家市场监督管理总局, 国家标准化管理委员会. 饲料中粗蛋白的测定凯氏定氮法: GB/T 6432—2018[S]. 北京: 中国标准出版社, 2018.
	State Administration of Market Regulation, Standardization Administration of the People’s Republic of China. Determination of crude protein in feeds—Kjeldahl method: GB/T 6432—2018[S]. Beijing: Standards Press of China, 2018. (in Chinese)
[11]	熊本海, 罗清尧, 赵峰, 郑姗姗. 中国饲料成分及营养价值表(2021年第32版)制订说明. 中国饲料, 2021(23): 97.
	XIONG B H, LUO Q Y, ZHAO F, ZHENG S S. Introduction of tables of feed composition and nutritive values in China (2021 thirty-second edition). China Feed, 2021(23): 97. (in Chinese)
[12]	临沂市市场监督管理局. 琅琊鸡笼养饲养管理技术规程.DB 3713/T223[S]. 临沂, 2021.
	Linyi City Market Supervision Administration. Technical regulations for cage rearing and feeding management of Langya chickens.DB 3713/T223[S]. Linyi, 2021. (in Chinese)
[13]	中华人民共和国农业部. 家禽生产性能名词术语和度量统计方法: NY/T 823—2004[S]. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2004.
	Ministry of Agriculture of the People’s Republic of China. Performance ferms and measurement for poultry: NY/T 823—2004[S]. Beijing: China Agriculture Press, 2004. (in Chinese)
[14]	高飞宇, 张卫云, 李鼎, 张丽阳, 吴炳鑫, 吴伟, 朱玲, 胡云, 崔小燕, 汪圣晨, 李婷婷, 罗绪刚. 饲粮氯化钠缺乏或过量对22-42日龄肉仔鸡生长性能、肠道形态、盲肠菌群及短链脂肪酸含量的影响. 中国家禽, 2024, 46(4): 40-46.
	GAO F Y, ZHANG W Y, LI D, ZHANG L Y, WU B X, WU W, ZHU L, HU Y, CUI X Y, WANG S C, LI T T, LUO X G. Effect of dietary sodium chloride deficiency or excess on growth performance, intestinal morphology, caecal microflora and short-chain fatty acid content of broilers from 22 to 42 days of age. China Poultry, 2024, 46(4): 40-46. (in Chinese)
[15]	SIMITZIS P E, KALOGERAKI E, GOLIOMYTIS M, CHARISMIADOU M A, TRIANTAPHYLLOPOULOS K, AYOUTANTI A, NIFOROU K, HAGER-THEODORIDES A L, DELIGEORGIS S G. Impact of stocking density on broiler growth performance, meat characteristics, behavioural components and indicators of physiological and oxidative stress. British Poultry Science, 2012, 53(6): 721-730. doi: 10.1080/00071668.2012.745930 pmid: 23398415
[16]	QAID M, ALBATSHAN H, SHAFEY T, HUSSEIN E, ABUDABOS A M. Effect of stocking density on the performance and immunity of 1- to 14-d- old broiler chicks. Revista Brasileira de Ciência Avícola, 2016, 18(4): 683-692.
[17]	张蒙, 黄晨轩, 岳巧娴, 锡建中, 代占辉, 赵晓钰, 陈辉. 饲养密度对大午金凤商品代蛋雏鸡生长性能、器官指数及血清抗氧化指标的影响. 中国家禽, 2018, 40(4): 36-41.
	ZHANG M, HUANG C X, YUE Q X, XI J Z, DAI Z H, ZHAO X Y, CHEN H. Effects of stocking density on growth performance, immune organs indexes and seram antioxidant capacity of Dawujinfeng commercial layer chicks. China Poultry, 2018, 40(4): 36-41. (in Chinese)
[18]	刘玮, 韩海霞, 李大鹏, 陶家树, 雷秋霞, 周艳, 刘杰, 王杰, 曹顶国, 李福伟, 邵庆平, 李惠敏. 饲养密度对蛋鸡生产性能、蛋品质、血清指标和肠道组织形态的影响. 动物营养学报, 2022, 34(11): 7002-7012. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-267x.2022.11.021
	LIU W, HAN H X, LI D P, TAO J S, LEI Q X, ZHOU Y, LIU J, WANG J, CAO D G, LI F W, SHAO Q P, LI H M. Effects of stocking density on laying performance, egg quality, serum parameters and intestinal morphology of laying hens. Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2022, 34(11): 7002-7012. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-267x.2022.11.021
[19]	万文龙, 俸艳萍, 龚炎长, 张弘毅, 王莹. 不同饲养密度对地面平养蛋鸡福利状况和生产性能的影响. 中国家禽, 2019, 41(19): 39-45.
	WAN W L, FENG Y P, GONG Y C, ZHANG H Y, WANG Y. Effect of different stocking density on welfare status and production performance of layer raising on floor. China Poultry, 2019, 41(19): 39-45. (in Chinese)
[20]	ZABIR M, MIAH M A, ALAM M, BHUIYAN M E J, HAQUE M I, SUJAN K M, MUSTARI A. Impacts of stocking density rates on welfare, growth and hemato-biochemical profile in broiler chickens. Journal of Advanced Veterinary and Animal Research, 2021; 8(4): 642-649.
[21]	SUGIHARTO S. Dietary strategies to alleviate high-stocking-density- induced stress in broiler chickens - a comprehensive review. Archives Animal Breeding, 2022, 65(1): 21-36.
[22]	SHIRA E B, SKLAN D, FRIEDMAN A. Impaired immune responses in broiler hatchling hindgut following delayed access to feed. Veterinary Immunology and Immunopathology, 2005, 105(1-2): 33-45. pmid: 15797473
[23]	NIBA A T, BEAL J D, KUDI A C, BROOKS P H. Bacterial fermentation in the gastrointestinal tract of non-ruminants: Influence of fermented feeds and fermentable carbohydrates. Tropical Animal Health and Production, 2009, 41(7): 1393-1407. doi: 10.1007/s11250-009-9327-6 pmid: 19283504
[24]	MANCABELLI L, FERRARIO C, MILANI C, MANGIFESTA M, TURRONI F, DURANTI S, LUGLI G A, VIAPPIANI A, OSSIPRANDI M C, VAN SINDEREN D, VENTURA M. Insights into the biodiversity of the gut microbiota of broiler chickens. Environmental Microbiology, 2016, 18(12): 4727-4738. doi: 10.1111/1462-2920.13363 pmid: 27129897
[25]	STANLEY D, GEIER M S, DENMAN S E, HARING V R, CROWLEY T M, HUGHES R J, MOORE R J. Identification of chicken intestinal microbiota correlated with the efficiency of energy extraction from feed. Veterinary Microbiology, 2013, 164(1/2): 85-92.
[26]	KOU X Y, MA Q S, LIU Y H, KHAN M Z, WU B X, CHEN W T, LIU X T, WANG C F, LI Y. Exploring the effect of gastrointestinal Prevotella on growth performance traits in livestock animals. Animals, 2024, 14(13): 1965.
[27]	SHAH T, GUO X S, SONG Y W, FANG Y G, DING L M. Comparative analysis of gut bacterial diversity in wild and domestic yaks on the Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau. Animals, 2024, 14(16): 2380.
[28]	XIE C L, CHENG J H, CHEN P, YAN X, LUO C L, QU H, SHU D M, JI J. Integrating gut and IgA-coated microbiota to identify Blautia as a probiotic for enhancing feed efficiency in chickens. iMeta, 2025, 4(1): e264.
[29]	HE Z X, LIU R R, WANG M J, WANG Q, ZHENG J M, DING J Q, WEN J, FAHEY A G, ZHAO G P. Combined effect of microbially derived cecal SCFA and host genetics on feed efficiency in broiler chickens. Microbiome, 2023, 11(1): 198. doi: 10.1186/s40168-023-01627-6 pmid: 37653442
[30]	YIN Z C, JI S Y, YANG J T, GUO W, LI Y L, REN Z Z, YANG X J. Cecal microbial succession and its apparent association with nutrient metabolism in broiler chickens. mSphere, 2023, 8(3): e0061422.
[31]	RAMAN M, AMBALAM P, DOBLE M. Short-chain fatty acids. Probiotics and Bioactive Carbohydrates in Colon Cancer Management. New Delhi: Springer India, 2016: 97-115.
[32]	SMITS L P, BOUTER K E C, DE VOS W M, BORODY T J, NIEUWDORP M. Therapeutic potential of fecal microbiota transplantation. Gastroenterology, 2013, 145(5): 946-953. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2013.08.058 pmid: 24018052
[33]	SHEN A, EDWARDS A N, SARKER M R, PAREDES-SABJA D. Sporulation and germination in clostridial pathogens. Microbiology Spectrum, 2019, 7(6). doi:10.1128/microbiolspec.GPP3-0017-2018.
[34]	LEE J, D’AIGLE J, ATADJA L, QUAICOE V, HONARPISHEH P, GANESH B P, HASSAN A, GRAF J, PETROSINO J, PUTLURI N, et al. Gut microbiota-derived short-chain fatty acids promote poststroke recovery in aged mice. Circulation Research, 2020, 127(4): 453-465. doi: 10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.119.316448 pmid: 32354259
[35]	YEOMAN C J, CHIA N, JERALDO P, SIPOS M, GOLDENFELD N D, WHITE B A. The microbiome of the chicken gastrointestinal tract. Animal Health Research Reviews, 2012, 13(1): 89-99. doi: 10.1017/S1466252312000138 pmid: 22853945
[36]	LIU L X, LI Q Q, YANG Y J, GUO A W. Biological function of short-chain fatty acids and its regulation on intestinal health of poultry. Frontiers in Veterinary Science, 2021, 8: 736739.
[37]	PANDA A K, RAMA RAO S V, RAJU M V L N, SUNDER C S. Effect of butyric acid on performance, gastrointestinal tract health and carcass characteristics in broiler chickens. Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences, 2009, 22(7): 1026-1031.
[38]	ONRUST L, VAN DRIESSCHE K, DUCATELLE R, SCHWARZER K, HAESEBROUCK F, VAN IMMERSEEL F. Valeric acid glyceride esters in feed promote broiler performance and reduce the incidence of necrotic enteritis. Poultry Science, 2018, 97(7): 2303-2311. doi: 10.3382/ps/pey085 pmid: 29562369
[39]	ZDUNCZYK Z, JANKOWSKI J, MIKULSKI D, PRZYBYLSKA- GORNOWICZ B, SOSNOWSKA E, JUSKIEWICZ J. Gastrointestinal morphology and function in turkeys fed diets diluted with whole grain wheat. Poultry Science, 2013, 92(7): 1799-1811. doi: 10.3382/ps.2012-02482 pmid: 23776267
[40]	SUN B S, HOU L Y, YANG Y. The development of the gut microbiota and short-chain fatty acids of layer chickens in different growth periods. Frontiers in Veterinary Science, 2021, 8: 666535.
[41]	JING Y, YUAN Y Q, MONSON M, WANG P, MU F, ZHANG Q, NA W, ZHANG K, WANG Y X, LENG L, et al. Multi-omics association reveals the effects of intestinal microbiome-host interactions on fat deposition in broilers. Frontiers in Microbiology, 2021, 12: 815538.
[42]	DING J M, ZHAO L L, WANG L F, ZHAO W J, ZHAI Z X, LENG L, WANG Y X, HE C, ZHANG Y, ZHANG H P, LI H, MENG H. Divergent selection-induced obesity alters the composition and functional pathways of chicken gut microbiota. Genetics, Selection, Evolution, 2016, 48(1): 93. pmid: 27894254

Metrics

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed

Comments

Recommended 0

No Suggested Reading articles found!

原料组成 Ingredient	含量 Content (%)	营养水平 Nutrient levels²⁾	含量 Content (%)
玉米 Corn	58.94	粗蛋白质 CP	16.50
大豆粕 Soybean meal	1.86	代谢能 ME/(MJ/kg)	12.82
麸皮 Rice bran	8.61	钙 Ca	3.36
玉米胚芽粕 Corn germ meal	5.00	总磷 TP	0.60
干酒糟及其可溶物 DDGS	10.00	有效磷 AP	0.44
石粉 Limestone	8.31	赖氨酸 Lys	0.79
玉米蛋白粉 Corn gluten meal	5.00	蛋氨酸 Met	0.39
磷酸氢钙 CaHPO₄	0.40	蛋+胱 Met+Sys	0.66
DL-蛋氨酸 Met	0.03	苏氨酸 Thr	0.59
盐(氯化钠) NaCl	0.30
L-赖氨酸硫酸盐70% L-lysine sulfate 70 %	0.50
70%氯化胆碱 70% Choline chloride	0.05
预混料 Premix¹⁾	1.00
合计 Total	100.00

周龄 Week- age	组别 Group	体重 Weight (g)	日增重 Daily gain	平均蛋重 average egg-weight (g)	日产蛋量 Daily egg production (g/只、日)	产蛋率 Laying rate (%)	采食量 Feed intake (g)	料蛋比 Feed-egg ratio
20	L	1215.24±15.27	—	29.76±3.54	0.84±0.05	2.82±0.42	110.89±6.87	—
	I	1231.18±21.54	—	28.52±2.86	0.73±0.04	2.58±0.37	109.45±3.58	—
	H	1226.62±31.63	—	29.34±4.18	0.80±0.07	2.74±0.62	110.24±4.35	—
	P	0.8742	—	0.9421	0.9367	0.7842	0.9248	—
23	AL	1587.66±26.51	17.70±0.16a	36.34±3.82a	8.09±1.04a	22.24±3.05a	123.27±6.62	15.23±2.14a
	AI	1528.23±20.86	14.14±0.59ab	35.28±5.75ab	6.53±1.28ab	18.52±2.42b	121.21±5.16	18.56±1.85b
	AH	1473.00±15.72	11.73±0.30b	34.61±7.24b	6.00±3.20b	17.34±1.86c	118.46±1.74	19.74±2.47b
	P	0.5748	0.0347	0.0426	0.0374	0.0235	0.8754	0.0407
43	BL	1844.73±18.25a	1.84±0.16a	45.52±1.87a	32.20±5.22a	70.74±5.23a	124.52±6.62	3.87±0.52a
	BI	1735.17±36.11ab	1.48±0.59ab	42.52±2.42ab	28.37±3.54ab	66.71±3.17b	122.74±5.16	4.32±0.47b
	BH	1645.36±28.19b	1.23±0.30b	40.43±2.74b	25.92±4.01b	64.13±4.12c	120.42±1.74	4.65±0.32b
	P	0.0347	0.0265	0.0342	0.0236	0.0410	0.8762	0.0405

组别Group	指数Shannon	指数Chao1	指数ACE	指数PD whole tree
AL	7.22	1051.94	1070.10	75.70
AI	6.97	986.77	994.75	77.45
AH	6.89	963.51	977.56	68.84
P value	0.904	0.879	0.887	0.865
BL	7.44	1286.10a	1293.29a	95.41a
BI	7.45	1155.05ab	1162.89ab	84.73ab
BH	7.13	1053.91b	1081.07b	77.86b
P	0.975	0.041	0.035	0.029

分组 Group	乙酸 Acetic acid	丙酸 Propionic acid	异丁酸 Isobutyric acid	丁酸 Butyric acid	异戊酸 Isovaleric acid	戊酸 Valeric acid
AL	1424.39a	722.11a	106.92a	306.54a	115.48	95.70a
AI	1594.38a	720.14a	101.10a	317.39a	111.37	95.22a
AH	1020.29b	512.45b	86.93b	193.09b	95.76	70.79b
P value	0.014	0.016	0.008	0.009	0.284	0.038
BL	1734.46	651.65b	77.52b	320.56	104.82	79.03b
BI	1794.30	784.67a	113.06a	335.94	109.71	110.43a
BH	1764.38	718.16a	95.29ab	328.25	107.27	94.73ab
P	0.925	0.042	0.024	0.946	0.937	0.035

Prediction and Analysis of Feeding Density on Production Performance, Cecal Flora Diversity, Short-Chain Fatty Acid Content and Microbial Differential Function of Langya Chickens

RichHTML

PDF

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

Figures/Tables 10

References 42

Related Articles 15

Metrics

Comments

Recommended 0

[1]	DONG JinLong, ZHAO Ying, YU HaiBing, LÜ JianYe, QIN JiaQi, LIANG Chen, MING Bo, LI ShaoKun. Multi-Model Elucidating of Nutritional Quality Contributions to Maize Kernel Test Weight and Regional Heterogeneity [J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2026, 59(5): 985-995.
[2]	ZHANG WenXuan, XIE ShuoQi, WU Xin, WANG YueQiang, LI YangGuang, ZHANG Zhen, REN XiaoLi, GAO TengYun, LIANG Dong, HUANG HeTian. Estimation of Genetic Parameters and Breeding Values for Birth Weight and Weaning Weight in Chinese Holstein Cattle [J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2026, 59(4): 900-911.
[3]	WANG YongSheng, NIU Li, WANG ChangJie, MA LiHua, LIAN XiaoXiao, MENG YaXiong, MA XiaoLe, YAO LiRong, ZHANG Hong, YANG Ke, LI BaoChun, WANG HuaJun, SI ErJing, WANG JunCheng. Genome-Wide Association Study and Candidate Gene Identification for Thousand Grain Weight in Winter Wheat [J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2026, 59(3): 499-514.
[4]	HE ZhiLin, SUN CuiXia, YUE HongLi, TAN YueXia, ZHANG YaoHai, WANG FuSheng, LIU SiTao, JIANG Dong. Genetic Diversity Analysis and GWAS of Alloocimene Based on Resequencing of Citron, Lemon Germplasm Resources [J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2026, 59(2): 386-401.
[5]	TANG HuaJun, WU WenBin, YU QiangYi, SHI Yun, DUAN YuLin, LI WenJuan, QIAN JianPing, SONG Qian, XIA Lang, LI HuiBin, SU BaoFeng, FAN BeiLei, HU Qiong, YE JianQiu, ZHANG Shuai. Developing a Lightweight Multimodal Model for Cropland Remote Sensing Monitoring [J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2026, 59(1): 78-89.
[6]	BAI YuXin, LIU LingZhi, AN TingTing, LI ShuangYi, WANG JingKuan. Eeffects of Long-Term Fertilization on Bacterial Community Structure and Carbon Metabolic Functions in Brown Soil [J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2025, 58(8): 1579-1590.
[7]	PAN LiYuan, WANG YongJun, LI HaiJun, HOU Fu, LI Jing, LI LiLi, SUN SuYang. Screening Regulatory Genes Related to Wheat Grain Protein Accumulation Based on Transcriptome and WGCNA Analysis [J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2025, 58(6): 1065-1082.
[8]	XU YuJuan, ZHANG Jie, WANG TianYi, CHEN HaoYang, ZHAO JiaJia, WU BangBang, HAO YuQiong, LI XiaoHua, ZHENG XingWei, ZUO JingJing, ZHENG Jun. Identification of Glu-A3 and Glu-B3 of Low-Molecular-Weight Glutenin in Shanxi Wheat and Its Effect on Quality [J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2025, 58(24): 5110-5127.
[9]	ZHANG Fan, TANG XiangFang, YANG Liang, WANG Hui, CHEN RuiPeng, XIONG BenHai. Research Progress of Intelligent Monitoring Technology for Beef Cattle Production Performance [J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2025, 58(23): 5081-5096.
[10]	CHEN CaiJin, MA Lin, JIANG QingXue, LIU JinHui, MIAO Tong, ZHANG ZhiPeng, MENG Xiang, MA XiaoRan, ZHOU XinYue, ZHANG Jian, LIU WenHui, WANG XueMin. Genetic Diversity Analysis of Phenotypic Traits of 244 Forage Oat Germplasm Resources [J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2025, 58(23): 4825-4836.
[11]	MU YingTong, LU JingShi, ZHANG YuTong, SHI FengLing. Identification of Key Drought-Responsive Genes in Upright Medicago ruthenica Sojak cv. Zhilixing Based on Transcriptome Sequencing and WGCNA [J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2025, 58(21): 4528-4543.
[12]	WEI YiMin, ZHOU MeiLiang, TANG Yu. Origin, Evolution and Spread of Crop Buckwheat [J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2025, 58(21): 4305-4316.
[13]	LIU XiaoXu, ZHONG ZeXin, QIU JiaRen, YANG ChunXiao, ZHANG YongJun, XIE Wen, ZHANG YouJun, PAN HuiPeng. GENETIC DIVERSITY OF MTCO1 IN DIFFERENT GEOGRAPHICAL POPULATIONS OF MEGALUROTHRIPS USITATUS [J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2025, 58(21): 4361-4371.
[14]	XIE HaiPeng, LIN JunXu, LIU Yong, MAI XianJun, LUO Feng, WANG XueWu, XIE Wen, LI ShaoKa, KONG XiangYi, WU XiaoYan. Effects of Different Organic Fertilizers on the Control of Cowpea Wilt by Bacillus velezensis SD13 [J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2025, 58(21): 4405-4420.
[15]	LI MingLi, WEN CaiYun, MA DongHao, LI CunJun, WANG YuWen, KANG Lu, LU Miao. Construction of Salinity Prediction Model Based on Optimal Selection of Soil Hyperspectral Characteristic Bands [J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2025, 58(20): 4054-4069.