Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26607965›Full record

ArticleMicrobiome2015

Metagenomic analysis of the microbiota in the highly compartmented hindguts of six wood- or soil-feeding higher termites.

Karen Rossmassler, Carsten Dietrich, Claire Thompson, Aram Mikaelyan, James O Nonoh, Rudolf H Scheffrahn, David Sillam-Dussès, Andreas Brune

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Microbiome, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed
4.4field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

35 citing papers in PubMed, 80 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Undervalued Pseudo-mSphere · 2021
    Article
  15. Comparison of Gut Bacterial Communities of Fall Armyworm (International journal of molecular sciences · 2021
    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

8 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Karen RossmasslerDepartment of Biogeochemistry, Max Planck Institute for Terrestrial Microbiology, Marburg, Germany.
Carsten DietrichDepartment of Biogeochemistry, Max Planck Institute for Terrestrial Microbiology, Marburg, Germany.
Claire ThompsonDepartment of Biogeochemistry, Max Planck Institute for Terrestrial Microbiology, Marburg, Germany.
Aram MikaelyanDepartment of Biogeochemistry, Max Planck Institute for Terrestrial Microbiology, Marburg, Germany.
James O NonohDepartment of Biogeochemistry, Max Planck Institute for Terrestrial Microbiology, Marburg, Germany.
Rudolf H ScheffrahnFort Lauderdale Research and Education Center, University of Florida, Davie, FL, USA.
David Sillam-DussèsLaboratory of Experimental and Comparative Ethology, University Paris 13, EA4443, Sorbonne Paris Cité, Villetaneuse, France.
Andreas BruneDepartment of Biogeochemistry, Max Planck Institute for Terrestrial Microbiology, Marburg, Germany. brune@mpi-marburg.mpg.de.
Max Planck Institute for Terrestrial Microbiology · DEPhilipps University of Marburg · DEUniversité Paris Cité · FRUniversity of Fort Lauderdale · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTermites are important contributors to carbon and nitrogen cycling in tropical ecosystems. Higher termites digest lignocellulose in various stages of humification with the help of an entirely prokaryotic microbiota housed in their compartmented intestinal tract. Previous studies revealed fundamental differences in community structure between compartments, but the functional roles of individual lineages in symbiotic digestion are mostly unknown.

resultsHere, we conducted a highly resolved analysis of the gut microbiota in six species of higher termites that feed on plant material at different levels of humification. Combining amplicon sequencing and metagenomics, we assessed similarities in community structure and functional potential between the major hindgut compartments (P1, P3, and P4). Cluster analysis of the relative abundances of orthologous gene clusters (COGs) revealed high similarities among wood- and litter-feeding termites and strong differences to humivorous species. However, abundance estimates of bacterial phyla based on 16S rRNA genes greatly differed from those based on protein-coding genes.

conclusionCommunity structure and functional potential of the microbiota in individual gut compartments are clearly driven by the digestive strategy of the host. The metagenomics libraries obtained in this study provide the basis for future studies that elucidate the fundamental differences in the symbiont-mediated breakdown of lignocellulose and humus by termites of different feeding groups. The high proportion of uncultured bacterial lineages in all samples calls for a reference-independent approach for the correct taxonomic assignment of protein-coding genes.

Indexed as

Gastrointestinal MicrobiomeMetagenomeMetagenomicsAnimalsBacteriaGenes, BacterialHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingIsopteraRNA, Ribosomal, 16SRNA, Ribosomal, 16S

Identifiers

PMID26607965
PMCPMC4660790
OpenAlexW2172678671

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.