ArticleScientific reports2020
Trait-Based Comparison of Coral and Sponge Microbiomes.
Article in Scientific reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 33 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative Effects of Recirculating and Rice-Co-Culture Systems on Growth-Quality Trade-Offs and Underlying Physiological Mechanisms in Red Claw Crayfish (Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- High compositional and functional similarity in the microbiome of deep-sea sponges.The ISME journal · 2024Article
- Microbiomes of three coral species in the Mexican Caribbean and their shifts associated with the Stony Coral Tissue Loss Disease.PloS one · 2024Article
- Article
- Article
- Depth effect on the prokaryotic community assemblage associated with sponges from different rocky reefs.PeerJ · 2022Article
- Circadian dynamics of the teleost skin immune-microbiome interface.Microbiome · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Corals and sponges harbor diverse microbial communities that are integral to the functioning of the host. While the taxonomic diversity of their microbiomes has been well-established for corals and sponges, their functional roles are less well-understood. It is unclear if the similarities of symbiosis in an invertebrate host would result in functionally similar microbiomes, or if differences in host phylogeny and environmentally driven microhabitats within each host would shape functionally distinct communities. Here we addressed this question, using metatranscriptomic and 16S rRNA gene profiling techniques to compare the microbiomes of two host organisms from different phyla. Our results indicate functional similarity in carbon, nitrogen, and sulfur assimilation, and aerobic nitrogen cycling. Additionally, there were few statistical differences in pathway coverage or abundance between the two hosts. For example, we observed higher coverage of phosphonate and siderophore metabolic pathways in the star coral, Montastraea cavernosa, while there was higher coverage of chloroalkane metabolism in the giant barrel sponge, Xestospongia muta. Higher abundance of genes associated with carbon fixation pathways was also observed in M. cavernosa, while in X. muta there was higher abundance of fatty acid metabolic pathways. Metagenomic predictions based on 16S rRNA gene profiling analysis were similar, and there was high correlation between the metatranscriptome and metagenome predictions for both hosts. Our results highlight several metabolic pathways that exhibit functional similarity in these coral and sponge microbiomes despite the taxonomic differences between the two microbiomes, as well as potential specialization of some microbially based metabolism within each host.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.