TABLE 4.
Effects of BRS on gut bacteria at the genus level.
| Genus name | NC (%) | MC (%) | LD (%) | MD (%) | HD (%) | PC (%) |
| Bacteroides | 3.990.94 | 3.881.24 | ↑18.659.43**## | 4.351.64 | ↑10.922.36*# | 3.710.90 |
| Ruminococcaceae_UCG-014 | 1.000.21 | 0.870.12 | ↑1.390.56# | 1.100.17 | ↓0.490.09* | 1.280.21 |
| Ruminococcaceae_UCG-005 | 0.400.08 | 0.400.06 | ↑1.530.68**## | 0.420.11 | 0.330.07 | 0.480.12 |
| Alistipes | 1.140.18 | 0.950.17 | ↑1.710.25*## | 1.040.29 | 0.870.16 | 1.160.16 |
| Akkermansia | 0.690.13 | 0.630.43 | ↑1.290.16*# | 0.330.38 | 0.640.09 | 0.380.26 |
| Parabacteroides | 0.390.13 | 0.250.07 | ↑0.880.36*## | 0.290.13 | ↑0.690.34# | 0.310.15 |
The values were expressed as mean ± standard error (SD). Statistical analysis was performed using a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) followed by LSD post hoc test. *p < 0.05 and **p < 0.01 vs. NC; #p < 0.05 and ##p < 0.01 vs. MC.