ArticleMicrobial ecology2023
Predator Presence Alters Intestinal Microbiota in Mussel.
Article in Microbial ecology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Assessing the individual and combined effects of ZnO nanoparticles and glyphosate on the gut microbiota of tadpoles.Frontiers in microbiology · 2026Article
- Effect of different fermentation substrates on rumen microorganisms and microbe-derived extracellular vesicles (EVs).Brazilian journal of microbiology : [publication of the Brazilian Society for Microbiology] · 2025Article
- Dynamic responses of gut microbiota to agricultural and wildfire ash: insights from different amphibian developmental stages.Frontiers in microbiology · 2025Article
- The impact of altered dietary adenine concentrations on the gut microbiota inFrontiers in microbiology · 2024Article
- The Functional Significance ofInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2023Article
- Characteristics and a comparison of the gut microbiota in two frog species at the beginning and end of hibernation.Frontiers in microbiology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Intestinal microbes are essential participants in host vital activities. The composition of the microbiota is closely related to the environmental factors. Predator presence may impact on intestinal microbiota of prey. In the present study, stone crab Charybdis japonica was used as potential predator, an external stress on mussel Mytilus coruscus, to investigate the intestinal microbiota alteration in M. coruscus. We set up two forms of predator presence including free crab and trapped crab, with a blank treatment without crab. The composition of intestinal microbiota in mussels among different treatments showed significant differences by 16S rRNA techniques. The biodiversity increased with trapped crab presence, but decreased with free crab presence. Neisseria, the most abundant genus, fell with the presence of crabs. Besides, the Arcobacter, a kind of pathogenic bacteria, increased with free crab presence. Regarding PICRUTs analysis, Environmental Information Processing, Genetic Information Processing and Metabolism showed differences in crab presence treatments compared with the blank, with a bit higher in the presence of free crab than trapped crab. In conclusion, trapped crab effects activated the metabolism and immunity of the intestinal flora, but free crabs made mussels more susceptible to disease and mortality, corresponding to the decreased biodiversity and the increased Arcobacter in their intestine.
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.