Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26542567›Full record

ArticleScience (New York, N.Y.)2015

The ecology of the microbiome: Networks, competition, and stability.

Katharine Z Coyte, Jonas Schluter, Kevin R Foster

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Science (New York, N.Y.), 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1,117 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1,117citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

1,117 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Principles for Rigorous Design and Application of Synthetic Microbial Communities.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Effect ofNutrients · 2026
    Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

1,057 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Katharine Z CoyteDepartment of Zoology, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK. Oxford Centre for Integrative Systems Biology, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Jonas SchluterDepartment of Zoology, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK. Oxford Centre for Integrative Systems Biology, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK. The Graduate University for Advanced Studies, Hayama, Kanagawa 240-0193, Japan. jonas.schluter+sokendai@gmail.com kevin.foster@zoo.ox.ac.uk.
Kevin R FosterDepartment of Zoology, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK. Oxford Centre for Integrative Systems Biology, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK. jonas.schluter+sokendai@gmail.com kevin.foster@zoo.ox.ac.uk.

Funding

European Research Council 242670
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The human gut harbors a large and complex community of beneficial microbes that remain stable over long periods. This stability is considered critical for good health but is poorly understood. Here we develop a body of ecological theory to help us understand microbiome stability. Although cooperating networks of microbes can be efficient, we find that they are often unstable. Counterintuitively, this finding indicates that hosts can benefit from microbial competition when this competition dampens cooperative networks and increases stability. More generally, stability is promoted by limiting positive feedbacks and weakening ecological interactions. We have analyzed host mechanisms for maintaining stability-including immune suppression, spatial structuring, and feeding of community members-and support our key predictions with recent data.

Indexed as

Models, BiologicalComputer SimulationEcological and Environmental PhenomenaGastrointestinal TractHumansImmune ToleranceMicrobial InteractionsMicrobiota

Identifiers

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.