Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30828985›Full record

ArticleMicrobiologyOpen2019

Patterns of community assembly in the developing chicken microbiome reveal rapid primary succession.

Stephanie D Jurburg, Michael S M Brouwer, Daniela Ceccarelli, Jeanet van der Goot, Alfons J M Jansman, Alex Bossers

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in MicrobiologyOpen, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 82 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
82citing 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

82 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. DRIVERS OF VARIATION OF THE ZEBRAFISH EGG MICROBIOME.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

22 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

6 authors.

Stephanie D JurburgDepartment of Infection Biology, Wageningen Bioveterinary Research, Lelystad, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-7701-6030
Michael S M BrouwerDepartment of Bacteriology and Epidemiology, Wageningen Bioveterinary Research, Lelystad, The Netherlands.
Daniela CeccarelliDepartment of Bacteriology and Epidemiology, Wageningen Bioveterinary Research, Lelystad, The Netherlands.
Jeanet van der GootDepartment of Bacteriology and Epidemiology, Wageningen Bioveterinary Research, Lelystad, The Netherlands.
Alfons J M JansmanWageningen Livestock Research, Wageningen, The Netherlands.
Alex BossersDepartment of Infection Biology, Wageningen Bioveterinary Research, Lelystad, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-6586-717X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The fine-scale temporal dynamics of the chicken gut microbiome are unexplored, but thought to be critical for chicken health and productivity. Here, we monitored the fecal microbiome of healthy chickens on days 1-7, 10, 14, 21, 28, and 35 after hatching, and performed 16S rRNA amplicon sequencing in order to obtain a high-resolution census of the fecal microbiome over time. In the period studied, the fecal microbiomes of the developing chickens showed a linear-log increase in community richness and consistent shifts in community composition. Three successional stages were detected: the first stage was dominated by vertically transmitted or rapidly colonizing taxa including Streptococcus and Escherichia/Shigella; in the second stage beginning on day 4, these taxa were displaced by rapid-growing taxa including Lachnospiraceae and Ruminococcus-like species variants; and in the third stage, starting on day 10, slow-growing, specialist taxa including Candidatus Arthrobacter and Romboutsia were detected. The patterns of displacement and the previously reported ecological characteristics of many of the dominant taxa observed suggest that resource competition plays an important role in regulating successional dynamics in the developing chicken gut. We propose that the boundaries between successional stages (3-4 and 14-21 days after hatching) may be optimal times for microbiome interventions.

Indexed as

MicrobiotaAnimalsBacteriaChickensCluster AnalysisDNA, BacterialDNA, RibosomalFecesPhylogenyRNA, Ribosomal, 16SSequence Analysis, DNATime FactorsDNA, BacterialDNA, RibosomalRNA, Ribosomal, 16Sbroilerchicken microbiomecommunity assemblyfecal microbiomeprimary succession

Identifiers

PMID30828985
PMCPMC6741130

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.