Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31701637›Full record

ArticleMicrobiologyOpen2020

Bacterial communities in the solid, liquid, dorsal, and ventral epithelium fractions of yak (Bos grunniens) rumen.

Qingmiao Ren, Huazhe Si, Xiaoting Yan, Chang Liu, Luming Ding, Ruijun Long, Zhipeng Li, Qiang Qiu

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in MicrobiologyOpen, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed
10.1field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

29 citing papers in PubMed, 58 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. The Effects of Composite Alkali-Stored SpentAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2024
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Microbiology spectrum · 2023
    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

8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Qingmiao RenState Key Laboratory of Grassland Agro-Ecosystems, School of Life Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China.
Huazhe SiDepartment of Special Animal Nutrition and Feed Science, Institute of Special Animal and Plant Sciences, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Changchun, China.
Xiaoting YanState Key Laboratory of Grassland Agro-Ecosystems, School of Life Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China.
Chang LiuResearch Center for Ecology and Environmental Sciences, Northwestern Polytechnical University, Xi'an, China.
Luming DingState Key Laboratory of Grassland Agro-Ecosystems, School of Life Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China.
Ruijun LongState Key Laboratory of Grassland Agro-Ecosystems, School of Life Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China.
Zhipeng LiDepartment of Special Animal Nutrition and Feed Science, Institute of Special Animal and Plant Sciences, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Changchun, China.
Qiang QiuState Key Laboratory of Grassland Agro-Ecosystems, School of Life Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China.ORCID 0000-0002-9874-271X
Lanzhou University · CNChinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences · CNNorthwestern Polytechnical University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Yak (Bos grunniens) is an important and dominant livestock species in the challenging environment of the Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau. Rumen microbiota of the solid, liquid, and epithelium fractions play key roles in nutrient metabolism and contribute to host adaptation in ruminants. However, there is a little knowledge of the microbiota in these rumen fractions of yak. Therefore, we collected samples of solid, liquid, dorsal, and ventral epithelium fractions from five female yaks, then amplified bacterial 16S rRNA gene V4 regions and sequenced them using an Illumina MiSeq platform. Principal coordinates analysis detected significant differences in bacterial communities between the liquid, solid, and epithelium fractions, and between dorsal and ventral epithelium fractions. Rikenellaceae RC9, the families Lachnospiraceae and Ruminococcaceae, and Fibrobacter spp. were the abundant and enriched bacteria in solid fraction, while the genera Prevotella and Prevotellaceae UCG 003 were higher in the liquid fraction. Campylobacter spp., Comamonas spp., Desulfovibrio spp., and Solobacterium spp. were significantly higher in dorsal epithelium, while Howardella spp., Prevotellaceae UCG 001, Ruminococcaceae UCG 005, and Treponema 2 were enriched in the ventral epithelium. Comparison of predictive functional profiles among the solid, liquid, and dorsal, and ventral epithelium fractions also revealed significant differences. Microbiota in the ventral fraction of yak rumen also significantly differ from reported microbiota of cattle. In conclusion, our results improve our knowledge of the taxonomic composition and roles of yak rumen microbiota.

Indexed as

MicrobiotaAnimalsBiodiversityCattleComputational BiologyGastric MucosaHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingMetagenomeMetagenomicsReal-Time Polymerase Chain ReactionRNA, Ribosomal, 16SRumenSequence Analysis, DNARNA, Ribosomal, 16SBos grunniensCampylobacter spp.dorsal and ventral epitheliumecology nichesHowardella spprumensolid and liquid

Identifiers

PMID31701637
PMCPMC7002109
OpenAlexW2983209843

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.