ArticleCanadian journal of veterinary research = Revue canadienne de recherche veterinaire2021
Description of the bacterial microbiota of anal sacs in healthy dogs.
Article in Canadian journal of veterinary research = Revue canadienne de recherche veterinaire, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Application of Next-Generation Sequencing (NGS) Techniques for Selected Companion Animals.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2024Review
- Article
- Characterization of the microbiome and volatile compounds in anal gland secretions from domestic cats (Felis catus) using metagenomics and metabolomics.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Characterization of the microbiome and volatile compounds in anal gland secretions from domestic cats (Felis catus) using metagenomics and metabolomics.Research square · 2023Article
- Characterization of the Fecal and Mucosa-Associated Microbiota in Dogs with Chronic Inflammatory Enteropathy.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2023Article
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of the present study was to characterize the bacterial microbiota of anal sacs in healthy dogs using NGS. Swabs were used to sample the rectum and secretions from each anal sac in 15 healthy dogs. DNA was extracted from swabs and the V4 hypervariable region of the 16S rRNA gene was amplified and sequenced with Illumina MiSeq. Overall, 14 different bacterial phyla were identified in the rectum and in both anal sacs, the 5 main ones being Firmicutes, Bacteroidetes, Proteobacteria, Actinobacteria, and Fusobacteria. The rectum had higher microbial diversity and richness than the left and right anal sacs. Community membership and structure significantly differed between the rectum and both anal sacs, but not between the right and the left anal sacs. This study showed that the diversity and richness of the bacterial microbiota of the anal sacs in dogs is greater than what has been reported in previous studies with culture-based methods. In conclusion, the bacterial microbiota of the anal sacs in dogs varies between individuals and differs from the rectal bacterial microbiota.
Indexed as
Identifiers
33390648PMC7747662W3118468254What 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.