Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23475620›Full record

ArticleApplied and environmental microbiology2013

Microbe-dependent and nonspecific effects of procedures to eliminate the resident microbiota from Drosophila melanogaster.

Emma V Ridley, Adam C N Wong, Angela E Douglas

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Applied and environmental microbiology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 42 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
42citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

42 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. The immunostimulatory role of anFrontiers in insect science · 2023
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Bugs on Drugs: AMicroorganisms · 2022
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Antibiotics reduce bacterial load inAccess microbiology · 2022
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Emma V RidleyDepartment of Biology, University of York, York, UK.
Adam C N Wong
Angela E Douglas

Funding

The protein nutrition of the symbiotic system between /Drosophila/and its gut micR01GM095372 · NIGMS · CORNELL UNIVERSITY · PI SEARLE, ANGELA E · 2011 to 2019
$2.8M
Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research CouncilNIGMS NIH HHS 1R01GM095372NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM095372
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Comparisons of animals bearing and lacking microorganisms can offer valuable insight into the interactions between animal hosts and their resident microbiota. Most hosts are naturally infected, and therefore, these comparisons require specific procedures (e.g., antibiotic treatment or physical exclusion of microorganisms) to disrupt the microbiota, but the potential for confounding nonspecific effects of the procedure on the traits of the host exists. Microbe-dependent and nonspecific effects can be discriminated by using multiple procedures: microbe-dependent effects are evident in hosts made microbe free by different procedures, but nonspecific effects are unique to individual procedures. As a demonstration, two procedures, oral administration of chlortetracycline (50 μg ml(-1) diet) and microbiota removal by egg dechorionation, were applied to Drosophila melanogaster in a 2-by-2 factorial design. Microorganisms were undetectable in flies from dechorionated eggs and reduced by >99% in chlortetracycline-treated flies. Drosophila flies subjected to both protocols displayed an extended preadult development time, suggesting that the microbiota promotes the development rate. Female chlortetracycline-treated flies, whether from untreated or dechorionated eggs, displayed reduced protein content and egg fecundity, which could be attributed to the nonspecific effect of the antibiotic. We recommend that procedures used to disrupt the microbiota of animals should be selected, following systematic analysis of alternative mechanistically distinct procedures, on the basis of two criteria: those that achieve the greatest reduction (ideally, elimination) of the microbiota and those that achieve minimal nonspecific effects.

Indexed as

AcetobacterAnimalsBacterial LoadChlortetracyclineDrosophila melanogasterFemaleFertilityLactobacillusMaleMicrobiotaOvumRNA, BacterialRNA, Ribosomal, 16STime FactorsChlortetracyclineRNA, BacterialRNA, Ribosomal, 16S

Identifiers

PMID23475620
PMCPMC3685244

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.