Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24223880›Full record

ArticlePloS one2013

Brood ball-mediated transmission of microbiome members in the dung beetle, Onthophagus taurus (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae).

Anne M Estes, David J Hearn, Emilie C Snell-Rood, Michele Feindler, Karla Feeser, Tselotie Abebe, Julie C Dunning Hotopp, Armin P Moczek

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 52 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
52citing papers in PubMed
7.3field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

52 citing papers in PubMed, 107 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Metagenomes and metagenome-assembled genomes fromMicrobiology resource announcements · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. From microbiome composition to functional engineering, one step at a time.Microbiology and molecular biology reviews : MMBR · 2023
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Gut bacteria of adult and larvalFrontiers in microbiology · 2023
    Article
  20. Journal of nematology · 2022
    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

8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Anne M EstesTowson University, Department of Biological Sciences, Baltimore, Maryland, United States of America ; Institute for Genome Sciences, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, United States of America.
David J Hearn
Emilie C Snell-Rood
Michele Feindler
Karla Feeser
Tselotie Abebe
Julie C Dunning Hotopp
Armin P Moczek
Towson University · USIndiana University Bloomington · USJ. Craig Venter Institute · USUniversity of Maryland, Baltimore · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Insects feeding on plant sap, blood, and other nutritionally incomplete diets are typically associated with mutualistic bacteria that supplement missing nutrients. Herbivorous mammal dung contains more than 86% cellulose and lacks amino acids essential for insect development and reproduction. Yet one of the most ecologically necessary and evolutionarily successful groups of beetles, the dung beetles (Scarabaeinae) feeds primarily, or exclusively, on dung. These associations suggest that dung beetles may benefit from mutualistic bacteria that provide nutrients missing from dung. The nesting behaviors of the female parent and the feeding behaviors of the larvae suggest that a microbiome could be vertically transmitted from the parental female to her offspring through the brood ball. Using sterile rearing and a combination of molecular and culture-based techniques, we examine transmission of the microbiome in the bull-headed dung beetle, Onthophagus taurus. Beetles were reared on autoclaved dung and the microbiome was characterized across development. A ~1425 bp region of the 16S rRNA identified Pseudomonadaceae, Enterobacteriaceae, and Comamonadaceae as the most common bacterial families across all life stages and populations, including cultured isolates from the 3(rd) instar digestive system. Finer level phylotyping analyses based on lepA and gyrB amplicons of cultured isolates placed the isolates closest to Enterobacter cloacae, Providencia stuartii, Pusillimonas sp., Pedobacter heparinus, and Lysinibacillus sphaericus. Scanning electron micrographs of brood balls constructed from sterile dung reveals secretions and microbes only in the chamber the female prepares for the egg. The use of autoclaved dung for rearing, the presence of microbes in the brood ball and offspring, and identical 16S rRNA sequences in both parent and offspring suggests that the O. taurus female parent transmits specific microbiome members to her offspring through the brood chamber. The transmission of the dung beetle microbiome highlights the maintenance and likely importance of this newly-characterized bacterial community.

Indexed as

SymbiosisAnimalsBacteriaCattleColeopteraComamonadaceaeDNA, BacterialEnterobacteriaceaeFemaleHost-Pathogen InteractionsLarvaManureMicrobiotaMolecular Sequence DataPhylogenyPseudomonadaceaeDNA, BacterialManureRNA, Ribosomal, 16S

Identifiers

PMID24223880
PMCPMC3815100
OpenAlexW2068278997

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.