ArticleHeredity2021
Experimental validation of small mammal gut microbiota sampling from faeces and from the caecum after death.
Article in Heredity, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- A new paradigm of bidirectional regulation of the gut-spinal cord axis.Neural regeneration research · 2026Article
- Microbiome and metabolic disruption in acute vs. severe and enduring anorexia nervosa.NPJ biofilms and microbiomes · 2025Article
- Host Diet Preference Drives Diversity and Composition of Gut Microbiota in Captive Birds.Ecology and evolution · 2025Article
- Impact of degradation and time of sampling on gut Microbiome composition in wild-caught marine fish.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Associations between psychological or biological stress indicators and gut microbiota in pregnant women - findings from a prospective longitudinal study.BMC microbiology · 2025Article
- The strength of gut microbiota transfer along social networks and genealogical lineages in the house mouse.FEMS microbiology ecology · 2024Article
- Habitat shapes the gut microbiome diversity of Malayan tigers (Panthera tigris jacksoni) as revealed through metabarcoding 16S rRNA profiling.World journal of microbiology & biotechnology · 2024Article
- Convergence of gut phage communities but not bacterial communities following wild mouse bacteriophage transplantation into captive house mice.The ISME journal · 2024Article
- Investigating the effects of radiation, T cell depletion, and bone marrow transplantation on murine gut microbiota.Frontiers in microbiology · 2024Article
- Discrete patterns of microbiome variability across timescales in a wild rodent population.BMC microbiology · 2023Article
- Comparing invasive and noninvasive faecal sampling in wildlife microbiome studies: A case study on wild common cranes.Molecular ecology resources · 2023Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Data on the gut microbiota (GM) of wild animals are key to studies on evolutionary biology (host-GM interactions under natural selection), ecology and conservation biology (GM as a fitness component closely connected to the environment). Wildlife GM sampling often requires non-invasive techniques or sampling from dead animals. In a controlled experiment profiling microbial 16S rRNA in 52 house mice (Mus musculus) from eight families and four genetic backgrounds, we studied the effects of live- and snap-trapping on small mammal GM and evaluated the suitability of microbiota from non-fresh faeces as a proxy for caecal GM. We compared CM from individuals sampled 16-18 h after death with those in live traps and caged controls, and caecal and faecal GM collected from mice in live-traps. Sampling delay did not affect GM composition, validating data from fresh cadavers or snap-trapped animals. Animals trapped overnight displayed a slight but significant difference in GM composition to the caged controls, though the change only had negligible effect on GM diversity, composition and inter-individual divergence. Hence, the trapping process appears not to bias GM profiling. Despite their significant difference, caecal and faecal microbiota were correlated in composition and, to a lesser extent, diversity. Both showed congruent patterns of inter-individual divergence following the natural structure of the dataset. Thus, the faecal microbiome represents a good non-invasive proxy of the caecal microbiome, making it suitable for detecting biologically relevant patterns. However, care should be taken when analysing mixed datasets containing both faecal and caecal samples.
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.