Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33602335›Full record

ArticleAnimal microbiome2021

Flexibility and resilience of great tit (Parus major) gut microbiomes to changing diets.

Kasun H Bodawatta, Inga Freiberga, Katerina Puzejova, Katerina Sam, Michael Poulsen, Knud A Jønsson

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Animal microbiome, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed
4.7field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

30 citing papers in PubMed, 69 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Key findings from 15 years ofApplied and environmental microbiology · 2025
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Zoological research · 2024
    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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Kasun H BodawattaNatural History Museum of Denmark, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark. bodawatta@snm.ku.dk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6095-9059
Inga FreibergaBiology Centre of Czech Academy of Sciences, Institute of Entomology, Ceske Budejovice, Czech Republic.
Katerina PuzejovaBiology Centre of Czech Academy of Sciences, Institute of Entomology, Ceske Budejovice, Czech Republic.
Katerina SamBiology Centre of Czech Academy of Sciences, Institute of Entomology, Ceske Budejovice, Czech Republic.
Michael PoulsenSection for Ecology and Evolution, Department of Biology, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Knud A JønssonNatural History Museum of Denmark, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Czech Academy of Sciences · CZUniversity of Copenhagen · DK

Funding

Carlsbergfondet CF17-0248Grantová Agentura České Republiky 18-23794YJihočeská Univerzita v Českých Budějovicích GAJU n.048/2019/P
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGut microbial communities play important roles in nutrient management and can change in response to host diets. The extent of this flexibility and the concomitant resilience is largely unknown in wild animals. To untangle the dynamics of avian-gut microbiome symbiosis associated with diet changes, we exposed Parus major (Great tits) fed with a standard diet (seeds and mealworms) to either a mixed (seeds, mealworms and fruits), a seed, or a mealworm diet for 4 weeks, and examined the flexibility of gut microbiomes to these compositionally different diets. To assess microbiome resilience (recovery potential), all individuals were subsequently reversed to a standard diet for another 4 weeks. Cloacal microbiomes were collected weekly and characterised through sequencing the v4 region of the 16S rRNA gene using Illumina MiSeq.

resultsInitial microbiomes changed significantly with the diet manipulation, but the communities did not differ significantly between the three diet groups (mixed, seed and mealworm), despite multiple diet-specific changes in certain bacterial genera. Reverting birds to the standard diet led only to a partial recovery in gut community compositions. The majority of the bacterial taxa that increased significantly during diet manipulation decreased in relative abundance after reversion to the standard diet; however, bacterial taxa that decreased during the manipulation rarely increased after diet reversal

conclusionsThe gut microbial response and partial resilience to dietary changes support that gut bacterial communities of P. major play a role in accommodating dietary changes experienced by wild avian hosts. This may be a contributing factor to the relaxed association between microbiome composition and the bird phylogeny. Our findings further imply that interpretations of wild bird gut microbiome analyses from single-time point sampling, especially for omnivorous species or species with seasonally changing diets, should be done with caution. The partial community recovery implies that ecologically relevant diet changes (e.g., seasonality and migration) open up gut niches that may be filled by previously abundant microbes or replaced by different symbiont lineages, which has important implications for the integrity and specificity of long-term avian-symbiont associations.

Indexed as

16S rRNA geneBacterial communitiesCommunity flexibilityCommunity resilienceGut symbiontsIllumina MiSeq

Identifiers

PMID33602335
PMCPMC7893775
OpenAlexW3120149701

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.