@article{gluck_bowman_layton_stuska_maltecca_pratt-phillips_2023, title={3 A comparison of the equine fecal microbiome within different horse populations}, volume={124}, ISSN={0737-0806}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jevs.2023.104305}, DOI={10.1016/j.jevs.2023.104305}, abstractNote={The equine fecal microbiome may vary across horse populations due to the diversity of the habitual diet. The purpose of this study was to assess and compare the microbial population of different horse populations, specifically the differences between feral versus domesticated populations. Samples were collected from 3 different populations of horses: horses from the Shackleford Banks (n = 24), a feral horse population living on the Outer Banks of North Carolina who eat native grasses such as Spartina marsh and island grasses; horses from the NCSU Equine Educational Unit (n = 18) that are predominantly kept on cool season mixed pastures and may be supplemented with hay and concentrates from time to time; and finally, privately owned horses (n = 36) that are fed mixed diets consisting of pasture, hay and concentrates. Horses were monitored and samples were collected immediately following a void by swabbing the middle of the void. Swabs were placed in a tube containing 500 uL DNA/RNA shield (Zymo Research, Irvine, CA) and were sent to the Emerging Technology Center (Purina Animal Nutrition, Gray Summit, MO) where they were stored at −80°C and then the V3 and V4 regions of the 16S rRNA gene were sequenced following the Illumina 16S Protocol (San Diego, CA). Samples were processed, filtered and trimmed through DADA2 using the QIIME2 pipeline. Statistical analysis was performed in R(Version 4.1.1) and a P-value of ≤0.05 was considered significant. After processing to eliminate samples with low sampling depth (<20,085), 78 total samples across the 3 populations were analyzed. For the results, when testing α diversity with Shannon's Index, a Kruskal-Wallis rank sum test revealed a significant difference between all populations (P = 0.01). There was a visual distinction between the Shackleford Banks population compared with the others when utilizing Bray-Curtis to assess β diversity. Additionally, an apparent significant difference between all populations using the PERMANOVA UniFrac test (P < 0.001) was observed. The 3 most predominant bacterial phylum seen across all populations were Firmicutes, Bacteroidetes and Spirochaetes. The top 5 phyla observed in the Shackleford Banks population were Firmicutes, Bacteroidetes, Spirochaetes, Kiritimatiellaeota and Fibrobacteres. Based on the results, there is a distinctive separation in microbial diversity between these horse populations, specifically between the Shackleford Banks horses versus the NCSU and privately owned horses. This separation is likely due to the habitual diet of these specific horse populations influencing the composition of their microbiome within the hindgut.}, journal={Journal of Equine Veterinary Science}, publisher={Elsevier BV}, author={Gluck, C. and Bowman, M. and Layton, J. and Stuska, S. and Maltecca, C. and Pratt-Phillips, S.}, year={2023}, month={May}, pages={104305} }
 @article{gluck_fellner_mcleod_stuska_pratt-phillips_2023, title={An in-Vitro Model of the Equine Fecal Microbiome to Assess How Horse Population Affects Fermentation Following a Starch Challenge}, volume={101}, ISSN={["1525-3163"]}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jas/skad068.048}, DOI={10.1093/jas/skad068.048}, abstractNote={Abstract}, journal={JOURNAL OF ANIMAL SCIENCE}, author={Gluck, Cassandra R. and Fellner, Vivek and McLeod, Sarah and Stuska, Sue and Pratt-Phillips, Shannon E.}, year={2023}, month={May} }
 @article{munjizun_gluck_walston_high_hunter_pratt-phillips_2023, title={Effect of weight carriage on work effort in horses}, volume={19}, ISSN={["1755-2559"]}, url={https://doi.org/10.1163/17552559-20220066}, DOI={10.1163/17552559-20220066}, abstractNote={Abstract}, number={5}, journal={COMPARATIVE EXERCISE PHYSIOLOGY}, author={Munjizun, A. and Gluck, C. and Walston, L. and High, K. and Hunter, R. and Pratt-Phillips, S.}, year={2023}, month={Dec}, pages={511–516} }
 @article{gluck_williams_pratt-phillips_2023, title={Performance analysis of show jumping rounds at a national pony competition}, volume={19}, ISSN={["1755-2559"]}, url={https://doi.org/10.1163/17552559-20220064}, DOI={10.1163/17552559-20220064}, abstractNote={Abstract}, number={5}, journal={COMPARATIVE EXERCISE PHYSIOLOGY}, author={Gluck, C. and Williams, J. and Pratt-Phillips, S.}, year={2023}, month={Dec}, pages={399–405} }
 @inproceedings{gluck_pratt-phillips_2021, title={65  Survey regarding the perception of prebiotics/probiotics amongst North Carolina horse owners or leasers}, volume={100}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jevs.2021.103528}, DOI={10.1016/j.jevs.2021.103528}, abstractNote={A survey was conducted to evaluate how prebiotics and probiotics are used and perceived among horse owners or leasers in North Carolina. This survey was deemed exempt from full review by the NCSU Institutional Review Board. Qualtrics was used to develop the survey and it allowed for multiple horses to be represented by one owner. There were 14 questions in the survey and these included information about if the respondent resided in North Carolina and their county, number of horses owned, information about the feed offered to their horses and the owner's use and perception of supplemental prebiotics and probiotics. The survey was shared to 7 different Facebook groups representing horse owners and equestrians of North Carolina, potentially reaching up to 63,300 members, though it is likely that many horse owners were members of multiple groups or were inactive. Therefore, neither true reach nor the response rate could be accurately determined, though a total of 501 surveys were completed. Of these, 52.9% reported offering feeds containing prebiotics or probiotics while 22.0% were unsure if their feed contains them. In addition, 32.7% of respondents offered a supplemental prebiotic or probiotic. Gastric/hindgut ulcers (39.8%) and colic (28.1%) were the most common health concerns reported by the owners. The majority of responders (82.7%) believe prebiotics and/or probiotics benefit their horse's gut health. When respondents were asked to comment on their experience regarding the use of prebiotics and probiotics, common words used included “health,” “beneficial,” “difference,” “happy,” “ulcer” and “diarrhea,” implying that prebiotics and probiotics are perceived to be beneficial by these horse owners and may be helping manage some of their equine's conditions. Further, 68.2% of the respondents believe that horse owners should consider implementing prebiotics and/or probiotics into a horse's daily feeding program. In conclusion, the results of this survey indicate that these horse owners are frequently using prebiotics and/or probiotics and are seeing beneficial changes to their horse's gut health. Since most prebiotic/probiotic efficacy studies are conducted on research animals, more work is required to establish the use and effectiveness of prebiotics and probiotics in privately owned horses.}, booktitle={Journal of Equine Veterinary Science}, author={Gluck, C. and Pratt-Phillips, S.}, year={2021}, month={May}, pages={103528} }