Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24025149›Full record

ArticleBMC research notes2013

Analysis of the gut microbiota of walking sticks (Phasmatodea).

Matan Shelomi, Wen-Sui Lo, Lynn S Kimsey, Chih-Horng Kuo

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC research notes, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.9field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 52 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Evolutionary and ecological consequences of gut microbial communities.Annual review of ecology, evolution, and systematics · 2019
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Caterpillars lack a resident gut microbiome.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2017
    Article
  16. Review
  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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Matan ShelomiInstitute of Plant and Microbial Biology, Academia Sinica, Taipei, Taiwan. chk@gate.sinica.edu.tw.
Wen-Sui Lo
Lynn S Kimsey
Chih-Horng Kuo
University of California, Davis · USAcademia Sinica · TWNational Chung Hsing University · TW

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLittle is known about the Phasmatodea gut microbial community, including whether phasmids have symbiotic bacteria aiding in their digestion. While symbionts are near ubiquitous in herbivorous insects, the Phasmatodea's distinctively thin body shape precludes the gut enlargements needed for microbial fermentation. High-throughput sequencing was used to characterize the entire microbiota of the fat bodies, salivary glands, and anterior and posterior midguts of two species of walking stick.

resultsMost bacterial sequences belonged to a strain of Spiroplasma (Tenericutes) found primarily in the posterior midgut of the parthenogenetic species Ramulus artemis (Phasmatidae). Beyond this, no significant differences were found between the R. artemis midgut sections or between that species and Peruphasma schultei (Pseudophasmatidae). Histological analysis further indicated a lack of bacteriocytes.

conclusionsPhasmids are unlikely to depend on bacteria for digestion, suggesting they produce enzymes endogenously that most other herbivorous insects obtain from symbionts. This conclusion matches predictions based on phasmid anatomy. The role of Spiroplasma in insects warrants further study.

Indexed as

PhylogenyAnimalsFat BodyHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingInsectaIntestinesMicrobiotaParthenogenesisSalivary GlandsSpiroplasmaSymbiosis

Identifiers

PMID24025149
PMCPMC3856447
OpenAlexW2118358886

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.