Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33499955›Full record

ArticleAnimal microbiome2019

Faecal inoculations alter the gastrointestinal microbiome and allow dietary expansion in a wild specialist herbivore, the koala.

Michaela D J Blyton, Rochelle M Soo, Desley Whisson, Karen J Marsh, Jack Pascoe, Mark Le Pla, William Foley, Philip Hugenholtz, Ben D Moore

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Animal microbiome, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
38citing papers in PubMed
3.9field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

38 citing papers in PubMed, 92 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. 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

9 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Michaela D J BlytonHawkesbury Institute for the Environment, Western Sydney University, Sydney, New South Wales, 2753, Australia. m.blyton@uq.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6112-5320
Rochelle M SooAustralian Centre for Ecogenomics, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, 4067, Australia.
Desley WhissonSchool of Life & Environmental Sciences, Deakin University, Melbourne, Victoria, 2134, Australia.
Karen J MarshEcology and Evolution, The Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, 2601, Australia.
Jack PascoeConservation Ecology Centre, Cape Otway, Victoria, 3233, Australia.
Mark Le PlaConservation Ecology Centre, Cape Otway, Victoria, 3233, Australia.
William FoleyEcology and Evolution, The Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, 2601, Australia.
Philip HugenholtzAustralian Centre for Ecogenomics, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, 4067, Australia.
Ben D MooreHawkesbury Institute for the Environment, Western Sydney University, Sydney, New South Wales, 2753, Australia.
Australian National University · AUThe University of Queensland · AUWestern Sydney University · AUDeakin University · AU

Funding

the Australian Research Council LP140100751
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDifferences between individuals in their gastrointestinal microbiomes can lead to variation in their ability to persist on particular diets. Koalas are dietary specialists, feeding almost exclusively on Eucalyptus foliage but many individuals will not feed on particular Eucalyptus species that are adequate food for other individuals, even when facing starvation. We undertook a faecal inoculation experiment to test whether a koala's gastrointestinal (GI) microbiome influences their diet. Wild-caught koalas that initially fed on the preferred manna gum (Eucalyptus viminalis) were brought into captivity and orally inoculated with encapsulated material derived from faeces from koalas feeding on either the less preferred messmate (E. obliqua; treatment) or manna gum (control).

resultsThe gastrointestinal microbiomes of wild koalas feeding primarily on manna gum were distinct from those feeding primarily on messmate. We found that the gastrointestinal microbiomes of koalas were unresponsive to dietary changes because the control koalas' GI microbiomes did not change even when the nocturnal koalas were fed exclusively on messmate overnight. We showed that faecal inoculations can assist the GI microbiomes of koalas to change as the treatment koalas' GI microbiomes became more similar to those of wild koalas feeding on messmate. There was no overall difference between the control and treatment koalas in the quantity of messmate they consumed. However, the greater the change in the koalas' GI microbiomes, the more messmate they consumed after the inoculations had established.

conclusionsThe results suggest that dietary changes can only lead to changes in the GI microbiomes of koalas if the appropriate microbial species are present, and/or that the koala gastrointestinal microbiome influences diet selection.

Indexed as

DietE. obliquaEucalyptusE. viminalisFaecal transplantGastrointestinalKoalaMicrobiome

Identifiers

PMID33499955
PMCPMC7803123
OpenAlexW2969525848

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.