Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31676854›Full record

ArticleThe ISME journal2020

Spatial and temporal axes impact ecology of the gut microbiome in juvenile European lobster (Homarus gammarus).

Corey C Holt, Mark van der Giezen, Carly L Daniels, Grant D Stentiford, David Bass

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The ISME journal, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing 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

21 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Virulence · 2026
    Article
  2. The impacts of biological invasions.Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society · 2026
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

5 authors.

Corey C HoltInternational Centre of Excellence for Aquatic Animal Health, Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science (Cefas), Barrack Road, Weymouth, Dorset, DT4 8UB, UK. C.C.Holt@exeter.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4222-6086
Mark van der GiezenBiosciences, College of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Exeter, Stocker Road, Exeter, UK.
Carly L DanielsThe National Lobster Hatchery, South Quay, Padstow, UK.
Grant D StentifordInternational Centre of Excellence for Aquatic Animal Health, Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science (Cefas), Barrack Road, Weymouth, Dorset, DT4 8UB, UK.
David BassInternational Centre of Excellence for Aquatic Animal Health, Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science (Cefas), Barrack Road, Weymouth, Dorset, DT4 8UB, UK. david.bass@cefas.co.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9883-7823

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/K003240/1Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/N013891/1Medical Research Council MR/M008924/1Wellcome Trust WT097835MFWellcome Trust WT101650MA
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Microbial communities within the gut can markedly impact host health and fitness. To what extent environmental influences affect the differential distribution of these microbial populations may therefore significantly impact the successful farming of the host. Using a sea-based container culture (SBCC) system for the on-growing of European lobster (Homarus gammarus), we tracked the bacterial gut microbiota over a 1-year period. We compared these communities with lobsters of the same cohort, retained in a land-based culture (LBC) system to assess the effects of the culture environment on gut bacterial assemblage and describe the phylogenetic structure of the microbiota to compare deterministic and stochastic assembly across both environments. Bacterial gut communities from SBCCs were generally more phylogenetically clustered, and therefore deterministically assembled, compared to those reared in land-based systems. Lobsters in SBCCs displayed significantly more species-rich and species-diverse gut microbiota compared to those retained in LBC. A reduction in the bacterial diversity of the gut was also associated with higher infection prevalence of the enteric viral pathogen Homarus gammarus nudivirus (HgNV). SBCCs may therefore benefit the overall health of the host by promoting the assembly of a more diverse gut bacterial community and reducing the susceptibility to disease.

Indexed as

AnimalsBacteriaDisease SusceptibilityGastrointestinal MicrobiomeHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingMetagenomicsMicrobial InteractionsNephropidaeNudiviridaePhylogenySeafoodVirus Diseases

Identifiers

PMID31676854
PMCPMC6976562

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.