Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35210551›Full record

ArticleThe ISME journal2022

Experimental evaluation of ecological principles to understand and modulate the outcome of bacterial strain competition in gut microbiomes.

Rafael R Segura Munoz, Sara Mantz, Ines Martínez, Fuyong Li, Robert J Schmaltz, Nicholas A Pudlo, Karthik Urs, Eric C Martens, Jens Walter, Amanda E Ramer-Tait

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The ISME journal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 46 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
46citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

46 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Frontiers in veterinary science · 2026
    Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. The Biology ofAnnual review of microbiology · 2025
    Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Rafael R Segura MunozDepartment of Food Science and Technology, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln, Nebraska, USA.
Sara MantzDepartment of Food Science and Technology, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln, Nebraska, USA.
Ines MartínezDepartment of Agricultural, Food and Nutritional Science, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada.
Fuyong LiDepartment of Agricultural, Food and Nutritional Science, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada.
Robert J SchmaltzDepartment of Food Science and Technology, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln, Nebraska, USA.
Nicholas A PudloDepartment of Microbiology and Immunology, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.
Karthik UrsDepartment of Microbiology and Immunology, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.
Eric C MartensDepartment of Microbiology and Immunology, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6681-2990
Jens WalterDepartment of Agricultural, Food and Nutritional Science, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada. jenswalter@ucc.ie.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1754-172X
Amanda E Ramer-TaitDepartment of Food Science and Technology, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln, Nebraska, USA. aramer-tait2@unl.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0950-7548

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

It is unclear if coexistence theory can be applied to gut microbiomes to understand their characteristics and modulate their composition. Through experiments in gnotobiotic mice with complex microbiomes, we demonstrated that strains of Akkermansia muciniphila and Bacteroides vulgatus could only be established if microbiomes were devoid of these species. Strains of A. muciniphila showed strict competitive exclusion, while B. vulgatus strains coexisted but populations were still influenced by competitive interactions. These differences in competitive behavior were reflective of genomic variation within the two species, indicating considerable niche overlap for A. muciniphila strains and a broader niche space for B. vulgatus strains. Priority effects were detected for both species as strains' competitive fitness increased when colonizing first, which resulted in stable persistence of the A. muciniphila strain colonizing first and competitive exclusion of the strain arriving second. Based on these observations, we devised a subtractive strategy for A. muciniphila using antibiotics and showed that a strain from an assembled community can be stably replaced by another strain. By demonstrating that competitive outcomes in gut ecosystems depend on niche differences and are historically contingent, our study provides novel information to explain the ecological characteristics of gut microbiomes and a basis for their modulation.

Indexed as

Gastrointestinal MicrobiomeAnimalsEcosystemGerm-Free LifeMiceVerrucomicrobia

Identifiers

PMID35210551
PMCPMC9122919

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.