Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30213049›Full record

ArticleMicroorganisms2018

Conservation Implications of Shifting Gut Microbiomes in Captive-Reared Endangered Voles Intended for Reintroduction into the Wild.

Nora Allan, Trina A Knotts, Risa Pesapane, Jon J Ramsey, Stephanie Castle, Deana Clifford, Janet Foley

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Microorganisms, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing 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

17 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
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

7 authors.

Nora AllanDepartment of Medicine and Epidemiology, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of California, Davis, CA 95616, USA. neallan@ucdavis.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-2183-1685
Trina A KnottsDepartment of Molecular Biosciences, University of California, Davis, CA 95616, USA. taknotts@ucdavis.edu.
Risa PesapaneDepartment of Medicine and Epidemiology, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of California, Davis, CA 95616, USA. rrpesapane@ucdavis.edu.
Jon J RamseyDepartment of Molecular Biosciences, University of California, Davis, CA 95616, USA. jjramsey@ucdavis.edu.
Stephanie CastleDepartment of Medicine and Epidemiology, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of California, Davis, CA 95616, USA. stcastle@ucdavis.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-8441-1573
Deana CliffordDepartment of Medicine and Epidemiology, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of California, Davis, CA 95616, USA. Deana.Clifford@wildlife.ca.gov.
Janet FoleyDepartment of Medicine and Epidemiology, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of California, Davis, CA 95616, USA. jefoley@ucdavis.edu.

Funding

California Department of Fish and Wildlife P1582003U.S. Bureau of Land Management L12AC20445U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service F14AP01006
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The Amargosa vole is a highly endangered rodent endemic to a small stretch of the Amargosa River basin in Inyo County, California. It specializes on a single, nutritionally marginal food source in nature. As part of a conservation effort to preserve the species, a captive breeding population was established to serve as an insurance colony and a source of individuals to release into the wild as restored habitat becomes available. The colony has successfully been maintained on commercial diets for multiple generations, but there are concerns that colony animals could lose gut microbes necessary to digest a wild diet. We analyzed feces from colony-reared and recently captured wild-born voles on various diets, and foregut contents from colony and wild voles. Unexpectedly, fecal microbial composition did not greatly differ despite drastically different diets and differences observed were mostly in low-abundance microbes. In contrast, colony vole foregut microbiomes were dominated by

Indexed as

Amargosa volecaptive breedingdietfecesforegutmicrobiotaMicrotus californicus scirpensis

Identifiers

PMID30213049
PMCPMC6165168

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.