Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34172822›Full record

ArticleCommunications biology2021

Human encroachment into wildlife gut microbiomes.

Gloria Fackelmann, Mark A F Gillingham, Julian Schmid, Alexander Christoph Heni, Kerstin Wilhelm, Nina Schwensow, Simone Sommer

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Communications biology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 48 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
48citing papers in PubMed
4.8field-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

48 citing papers in PubMed, 81 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Metagenomic analysis of the gut microbiota inFrontiers in microbiology · 2026
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Gloria FackelmannUlm University, Institute of Evolutionary Ecology and Conservation Genomics, Ulm, Germany. gloria.fackelmann@uni-ulm.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1684-5983
Mark A F GillinghamUlm University, Institute of Evolutionary Ecology and Conservation Genomics, Ulm, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7935-9539
Julian SchmidUlm University, Institute of Evolutionary Ecology and Conservation Genomics, Ulm, Germany.
Alexander Christoph HeniUlm University, Institute of Evolutionary Ecology and Conservation Genomics, Ulm, Germany.
Kerstin WilhelmUlm University, Institute of Evolutionary Ecology and Conservation Genomics, Ulm, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5583-2777
Nina SchwensowUlm University, Institute of Evolutionary Ecology and Conservation Genomics, Ulm, Germany.
Simone SommerUlm University, Institute of Evolutionary Ecology and Conservation Genomics, Ulm, Germany. simone.sommer@uni-ulm.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5148-8136
Universität Ulm · DESmithsonian Tropical Research Institute · PA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In the Anthropocene, humans, domesticated animals, wildlife, and their environments are interconnected, especially as humans advance further into wildlife habitats. Wildlife gut microbiomes play a vital role in host health. Changes to wildlife gut microbiomes due to anthropogenic disturbances, such as habitat fragmentation, can disrupt natural gut microbiota homeostasis and make animals vulnerable to infections that may become zoonotic. However, it remains unclear whether the disruption to wildlife gut microbiomes is caused by habitat fragmentation per se or the combination of habitat fragmentation with additional anthropogenic disturbances, such as contact with humans, domesticated animals, invasive species, and their pathogens. Here, we show that habitat fragmentation per se does not impact the gut microbiome of a generalist rodent species native to Central America, Tome's spiny rat Proechimys semispinosus, but additional anthropogenic disturbances do. Indeed, compared to protected continuous and fragmented forest landscapes that are largely untouched by other human activities, the gut microbiomes of spiny rats inhabiting human-disturbed fragmented landscapes revealed a reduced alpha diversity and a shifted and more dispersed beta diversity. Their microbiomes contained more taxa associated with domesticated animals and their potential pathogens, suggesting a shift in potential metagenome functions. On the one hand, the compositional shift could indicate a degree of gut microbial adaption known as metagenomic plasticity. On the other hand, the greater variation in community structure and reduced alpha diversity may signal a decline in beneficial microbial functions and illustrate that gut adaption may not catch up with anthropogenic disturbances, even in a generalist species with large phenotypic plasticity, with potentially harmful consequences to both wildlife and human health.

Indexed as

Adaptation, PhysiologicalAnimalsAnimals, WildEcosystemGastrointestinal MicrobiomeHumansMetagenomeMicrobiota

Identifiers

PMID34172822
PMCPMC8233340
OpenAlexW3175556532

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.