ArticleScientific reports2020
Oral and vaginal microbiota in selected field mice of the genus Apodemus: a wild population study.
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.
- Multi-Niche Microbiota of a Desert-Adapted Lizard: 16S rRNA Profiling ofAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025Article
- Microbial, proteomic, and metabolomic profiling of the estrous cycle in wild house mice.Microbiology spectrum · 2024Article
- Bacterial communities along parrot digestive and respiratory tracts: the effects of sample type, species and time.International microbiology : the official journal of the Spanish Society for Microbiology · 2024Article
- Vaginal microbial dynamics and pathogen colonization in a humanized microbiota mouse model.NPJ biofilms and microbiomes · 2023Article
- Wild rodents harbour high diversity ofPersoonia · 2023Article
- Functional, transcriptional, and microbial shifts associated with healthy pulmonary aging in rhesus macaques.Cell reports · 2022Article
- Biological Roles of Lipocalins in Chemical Communication, Reproduction, and Regulation of Microbiota.Frontiers in physiology · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Animal-associated microbiota is expected to impose crucial effects on the host's fitness-related performance, including reproduction. Most research to date has focused on interactions between the host with its gut microbiota; however, there remain considerable gaps in knowledge regarding microbial consortia in other organs, including interspecific divergence, temporal stability, variation drivers, and their effects on the host. To fill these gaps, we examined oral and vaginal microbiota composition in four free-living mouse species of the genus Apodemus, each varying in the degree of female promiscuity. To assess temporal stability and microbiota resistance to environmental change, we exposed one of the species, Apodemus uralensis, to standardized captive conditions and analyzed longitudinal changes in its microbiota structure. Our results revealed the existence of a "core" oral microbiota that was not only shared among all four species but also persisted almost unchanged in captivity. On the other hand, vaginal microbiota appears to be more plastic in captive conditions and less species-specific in comparison with oral microbiota. This study is amongst the first to describe oral microbiota dynamics. Furthermore, the vaginal microbiota results are especially surprising in light of the well-known role of stable vaginal microbiota as a defense against pathogens. The results indicate the existence of diverse mechanisms that shape each microbiota. On the other hand, our data provides somewhat ambiguous support for the systematic effect of phylogeny and social system on both oral and vaginal microbiota structures.
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.