ArticleApplied and environmental microbiology2021
Comparison of Strategies for Isolating Anaerobic Bacteria from the Porcine Intestine.
Article in Applied and environmental microbiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Exploring the predominant factors associated with shaping the cultivable swine gut microbiota of Wuzhishan piglets under in vitro cultivation conditions.BMC microbiology · 2026Article
- A modified iChip forApplied and environmental microbiology · 2025Article
- Decoding the intestinal microbiota repertoire of sow and weaned pigs using culturomic and metagenomic approaches.Journal of animal science and technology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The isolation of bacteria that represent the diversity of autochthonous taxa in the gastrointestinal tract is necessary to fully ascertain their function, but the majority of bacterial species inhabiting the intestines of mammals are fastidious and thus challenging to isolate. The goal of the current study was to isolate a diverse assemblage of anaerobic bacteria from the intestine of pigs as a model animal and to comparatively examine various novel and traditional isolation strategies. Methods used included long-term enrichments, direct plating, a modified ichip method, as well as ethanol and tyndallization treatments of samples to select for endospore-forming taxa. A total of 234 taxa (91 previously uncultured) comprising 80 genera and 7 phyla were isolated from mucosal and luminal samples from the ileum, cecum, ascending colon, and spiral colon removed from animals under anesthesia. The diversity of bacteria isolated from the large intestine was less than that detected by next-generation sequence analysis. Long-term enrichments yielded the greatest diversity of recovered bacteria (Shannon's index [SI] = 4.7). Methods designed to isolate endospore-forming bacteria produced the lowest diversity (SI ≤ 2.7), with tyndallization yielding lower diversity than the ethanol method. However, the isolation frequency of previously uncultured bacteria was highest for ethanol-treated samples (41.9%) and the ichip method (32.5%). The goal of recovering a diverse collection of enteric bacteria was achieved. Importantly, the study findings demonstrate that it is necessary to use a combination of methods in concert to isolate bacteria that are representative of the diversity within the intestines of mammals.
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.