Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32200746›Full record

ReviewPhilosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences2020

Ecological and evolutionary mechanisms underlying patterns of phylosymbiosis in host-associated microbial communities.

Kevin D Kohl

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 76 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
76citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

76 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

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

16 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

1 author.

Kevin D KohlDepartment of Biological Sciences, University of Pittsburgh, 4249 Fifth Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15260, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Phylosymbiosis, where similarities in host-associated microbial communities recapitulate the phylogeny of their hosts, is a newly recognized yet pervasive pattern in the field of host-microbe interactions. While phylosymbiosis has been documented across many systems, we still have a poor understanding of the mechanisms that underlie this emergent pattern. Host selection of the microbiome is a widely cited mechanism, yet other basic ecological and evolutionary processes (dispersal, drift and diversification) may also be at play. This paper discusses the roles that each of these processes and their interactions may play in yielding phylosymbiotic signals across hosts. Finally, this paper will identify open questions and methods that are required to better understand the relative contributions of these basic processes to phylosymbiosis. Given that phylosymbiosis has been shown to relate to functional components of host fitness, understanding the processes that contribute to these patterns will be important for our understanding of the ecology and evolution of host-microbe interactions. This article is part of the theme issue 'Conceptual challenges in microbial community ecology'.

Indexed as

Bacterial Physiological PhenomenaSymbiosisHost Microbial InteractionsMicrobiotacommunity assemblycommunity ecologyhost–microbe interactionsmicrobiome

Identifiers

PMID32200746
PMCPMC7133527

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.