Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29078799›Full record

ArticleMicrobiome2017

Comparing microbiotas in the upper aerodigestive and lower respiratory tracts of lambs.

Laura Glendinning, David Collie, Steven Wright, Kenny M D Rutherford, Gerry McLachlan

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Microbiome, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing 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

26 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. What Makes the Gut-Lung Axis Working? From the Perspective of Microbiota and Traditional Chinese Medicine.The Canadian journal of infectious diseases & medical microbiology = Journal canadien des maladies infectieuses et de la microbiologie medicale · 2024
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. The lung microbiome in lung transplantation.The Journal of heart and lung transplantation : the official publication of the International Society for Heart Transplantation · 2021
    Review
  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

5 authors.

Laura GlendinningThe Roslin Institute and Royal (Dick) School of Veterinary Studies, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, Midlothian, EH25 9RG, UK. laura.glendinning@roslin.ed.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0003-4789-6644
David CollieThe Roslin Institute and Royal (Dick) School of Veterinary Studies, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, Midlothian, EH25 9RG, UK.
Steven WrightThe Roslin Institute and Royal (Dick) School of Veterinary Studies, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, Midlothian, EH25 9RG, UK.
Kenny M D RutherfordAnimal Behaviour and Welfare, Animal and Veterinary Sciences Research Group, SRUC, West Mains Rd., Edinburgh, Midlothian, EH9 3JG, UK.
Gerry McLachlanThe Roslin Institute and Royal (Dick) School of Veterinary Studies, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, Midlothian, EH25 9RG, UK.

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/J01446X/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRecently, the importance of the lung microbiota during health and disease has been examined in humans and in small animal models. Whilst sheep have been proposed as an appropriate large animal model for studying the pathophysiology of a number of important human respiratory diseases, it is clearly important to continually define the limits of agreement between these systems as new concepts emerge. In humans, it has recently been established that the lung microbiota is seeded by microbes from the oral cavity. We sought to determine whether the same was true in sheep.

resultsWe took lung fluid and upper aerodigestive tract (oropharyngeal) swab samples from 40 lambs (7 weeks old). DNA extraction was performed, and the V2-V3 region of the 16S rRNA gene was amplified by PCR then sequenced via Illumina Miseq. Oropharyngeal swabs were either dominated by bacteria commonly associated with the rumen or by bacteria commonly associated with the upper aerodigestive tract. Lung microbiota samples did not resemble either the upper aerodigestive tract samples or reagent-only controls. Some rumen-associated bacteria were found in lung fluids, indicating that inhalation of ruminal bacteria does occur. We also identified several bacteria which were significantly more abundant in lung fluids than in the upper aerodigestive tract swabs, the most predominant of which was classified as Staphylococcus equorum.

conclusionsIn contrast to humans, we found that the lung microbiota of lambs is dissimilar to that of the upper aerodigestive tract, and we suggest that this may be related to physiological and anatomical differences between sheep and humans. Understanding the comparative physiology and anatomy underlying differences in lung microbiota between species will provide a foundation upon which to interpret changes associated with disease and/or environment.

Indexed as

MicrobiotaAgingAnimalsBacteriaDNA, BacterialLungMouthOropharynxPhylogenyRespiratory SystemRNA, Ribosomal, 16SRumenSequence Analysis, DNASheepStaphylococcusDNA, BacterialRNA, Ribosomal, 16S16SLambsLungMicrobiotaOropharynxRumenSheep

Identifiers

PMID29078799
PMCPMC5658956

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.