ArticleAnimal microbiome2021
Gut microbiota of frugo-folivorous sifakas across environments.
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 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Deficiency of Natural Plant-Derived Gut Metabolites Is a Potential Cause of Skeletal Deformities in Captive-Bred Green Peafowl (Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026Article
- Review
- Climate, diet, and nutrition drive gut microbiome variation in a fruit-specialist primate.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Why Didn't the Sifaka Cross the Road? Divergence of Propithecus edwardsi Gut Microbiomes Across Geographic Barriers in Ranomafana National Park, Madagascar.American journal of primatology · 2025Article
- Bacterial transmission within social groups shapes the underexplored gut microbiome in the lemur Indri indri.The ISME journal · 2025Article
- From leaves to microbes: How diet and season shape the fecal microbiome of captive Coquerel´s Sifakas (Frontiers in microbiomes · 2025Article
- Spatiotemporal differences induced changes in the structure and function of the gut microbiota in an endangered ungulate.Animal microbiome · 2024Article
- Cryptic diversity of cellulose-degrading gut bacteria in industrialized humans.Science (New York, N.Y.) · 2024Article
- Bifidobacteria define gut microbiome profiles of golden lion tamarin (Leontopithecus rosalia) and marmoset (Callithrix sp.) metagenomic shotgun pools.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Gut microbiota of ring-tailed lemurs (Lemur catta) vary across natural and captive populations and correlate with environmental microbiota.Animal microbiome · 2022Article
- The gut microbiome of exudivorous marmosets in the wild and captivity.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- The Gut Microbiome of 54 Mammalian Species.Frontiers in microbiology · 2022Article
- Antibiotics and fecal transfaunation differentially affect microbiota recovery, associations, and antibiotic resistance in lemur guts.Animal microbiome · 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCaptive animals, compared to their wild counterparts, generally harbor imbalanced gut microbiota owing, in part, to their altered diets. This imbalance is particularly striking for folivores that fundamentally rely on gut microbiota for digestion, yet rarely receive sufficient dietary fiber in captivity. We examine the critically endangered Coquerel's sifaka (Propithecus coquereli), an anatomically specialized, rather than facultative, folivore that consumes a seasonal frugo-folivorous diet in the wild, but is provisioned predominantly with seasonal foliage and orchard vegetables in captivity. Using amplicon and metagenomic sequencing applied to fecal samples collected from two wild and one captive population (each comprising multiple groups), we clarify how dietary variation underlies the perturbational effect of captivity on the structure and function of this species' gut microbiota.
resultsThe gut microbiota of wild sifakas varied by study population, most notably in community evenness and in the abundance of diet-associated microbes from Prevotellaeceae and Lachnospiraceae. Nevertheless, the differences among wild subjects were minor compared to those evident between wild and captive sifakas: Unusually, the consortia of captive sifakas were the most diverse, but lacked representation of endemic Bacteroidetes and metagenomic capacity for essential amino-acid biosynthesis. Instead, they were enriched for complex fiber metabolizers from the Firmicutes phylum, for archaeal methanogens, and for several metabolic pathways putatively linked to plant fiber and secondary compound metabolism.
conclusionsThe relatively minor differences in gut microbial structure and function between wild sifaka populations likely reflect regional and/or temporal environmental variability, whereas the major differences observed in captive conspecifics, including the loss of endemic microbes, but gain in low-abundance taxa, likely reflect imbalanced or unstable consortia. Indeed, community perturbation may not necessarily entail decreased community diversity. Moreover, signatures of greater fiber degradation indicate that captive sifakas consume a more fibrous diet compared to their wild counterparts. These results do not mirror those typically reported for folivores and herbivores, suggesting that the direction and strength of captivity-induced 'dysbiosis' may not be universal across species with similar feeding strategies. We propose that tailored, species-specific dietary interventions in captivity, aimed at better approximating naturally foraged diets, could functionally 'rewild' gut microbiota and facilitate successful management of diverse species.
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.