Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33499964›Full record

ArticleAnimal microbiome2020

Antibiotic-induced alterations and repopulation dynamics of yellowtail kingfish microbiota.

Thibault P R A Legrand, Sarah R Catalano, Melissa L Wos-Oxley, James W Wynne, Laura S Weyrich, Andrew P A Oxley

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Animal microbiome, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 42 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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

6 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Thibault P R A LegrandSchool of Biological Sciences, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA, Australia. thibault.legrand@adelaide.edu.au.
Sarah R CatalanoSouth Australian Research and Development Institute, Aquatic Sciences Centre, West Beach, SA, Australia.
Melissa L Wos-OxleyCollege of Science and Engineering, Flinders University, Adelaide, SA, Australia.
James W WynneCSIRO, Agriculture and Food, Hobart, TAS, Australia.
Laura S WeyrichSchool of Biological Sciences, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA, Australia.
Andrew P A OxleySouth Australian Research and Development Institute, Aquatic Sciences Centre, West Beach, SA, Australia. andrew.oxley@deakin.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6056-7602
Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation · AUDeakin University · AUFlinders University · AUPennsylvania State University · USSouth Australian Research and Development Institute · AU

Funding

Department of Agriculture, Australian Government 2016-200.30Fisheries Research and Development Corporation RnD4Profit 14-01-027
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe use of antibiotics in aquaculture is a common infection treatment and is increasing in some sectors and jurisdictions. While antibiotic treatment can negatively shift gut bacterial communities, recovery and examination of these communities in fish of commercial importance is not well documented. Examining the impacts of antibiotics on farmed fish microbiota is fundamental for improving our understanding and management of healthy farmed fish. This work assessed yellowtail kingfish (Seriola lalandi) skin and gut bacterial communities after an oral antibiotic combination therapy in poor performing fish that displayed signs of enteritis over an 18-day period. In an attempt to promote improved bacterial re-establishment after antibiotic treatment, faecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) was also administered via gavage or in the surrounding seawater, and its affect was evaluated over 15 days post-delivery.

resultsAntibiotic treatment greatly perturbed the global gut bacterial communities of poor-performing fish - an effect that lasted for up to 18 days post treatment. This perturbation was marked by a significant decrease in species diversity and evenness, as well as a concomitant increase in particular taxa like an uncultured Mycoplasmataceae sp., which persisted and dominated antibiotic-treated fish for the entire 18-day period. The skin-associated bacterial communities were also perturbed by the antibiotic treatment, notably within the first 3 days; however, this was unlike the gut, as skin microbiota appeared to shift towards a more 'normal' (though disparate) state after 5 days post antibiotic treatment. FMT was only able to modulate the impacts of antibiotics in some individuals for a short time period, as the magnitude of change varied substantially between individuals. Some fish maintained certain transplanted gut taxa (i.e. present in the FMT inoculum; namely various Aliivibrio related ASVs) at Day 2 post FMT, although these were lost by Day 8 post FMT.

conclusionAs we observed notable, prolonged perturbations induced by antibiotics on the gut bacterial assemblages, further work is required to better understand the processes/dynamics of their re-establishment following antibiotic exposure. In this regard, procedures like FMT represent a novel approach for promoting improved microbial recovery, although their efficacy and the factors that support their success requires further investigation.

Indexed as

16SrRNAAntibioticsFishFMTMicrobiome

Identifiers

PMID33499964
PMCPMC7807502
OpenAlexW3047193490

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.