Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28484639›Full record

ArticleRoyal Society open science2017

Skin microbiota differs drastically between co-occurring frogs and newts.

Molly C Bletz, R G Bina Perl, Miguel Vences

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Royal Society open science, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing 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

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Research Status and Prospect of Amphibian Symbiotic Microbiota.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Characterization of the Skin Cultivable Microbiota Composition of the FrogInternational journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Article
  8. Article
  9. The Skin Microbiota ofFrontiers in microbiology · 2019
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. 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.

Molly C BletzZoologisches Institut, Technische Universität Braunschweig, Mendelssohnstr. 4, 38106 Braunschweig, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-4120-9356
R G Bina PerlZoologisches Institut, Technische Universität Braunschweig, Mendelssohnstr. 4, 38106 Braunschweig, Germany.
Miguel VencesZoologisches Institut, Technische Universität Braunschweig, Mendelssohnstr. 4, 38106 Braunschweig, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Diverse microbial assemblages inhabit amphibian skin and are known to differ among species; however, few studies have analysed these differences in systems that minimize confounding factors, such as season, location or host ecology. We used high-throughput amplicon sequencing to compare cutaneous microbiotas among two ranid frogs (

Indexed as

16S amplicon sequencingAmphibiacutaneous bacterial communitiesfrogsnewts

Identifiers

PMID28484639
PMCPMC5414276

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.