ArticleMicrobiome2022
Comparison of microbial signatures between paired faecal and rectal biopsy samples from healthy volunteers using next-generation sequencing and culturomics.
Article in Microbiome, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
27 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 43 citations in OpenAlex.
- Gut microbiota-associated predictors as biomarkers of neoadjuvant treatment response in rectal cancer-a systematic review.British journal of cancer · 2026Pooled it
- The Female Reproductive Microbiome: Mechanistic Insights and Bioengineering Perspectives.Biology · 2026Review
- Beyond metagenomics: culturomics uncovers aerobic and facultative anaerobic bacterial diversity in the camel gut.Animal microbiome · 2026Article
- The Response of Mucosal Colonic Microbiota to Probiotic and Dietary Intervention In Vitro.Microorganisms · 2026Article
- Colonic biopsy-associated microbial signatures are predictive of response to anti-TNFα biological therapy in Crohn's disease.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2026Article
- Novel insights into carbohydrate utilisation, antimicrobial resistance, and sporulation potential inGut microbes · 2025Article
- Dual-approach analysis of gut microbiome in patients with type 1 diabetes and diabetic kidney disease.Annals of medicine · 2025Article
- Synergy between culturomics and metagenomics of health status-associated gut bacteria originating from non-IBD and IBD populations.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Relationships between the Microbiome and Response to Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy in Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer.Cancer research and treatment · 2025Article
- Metatranscriptomic analysis of colonic mucosal samples exploring the functional role of active microbial consortia in complicated diverticulitis.Microbiology spectrum · 2025Article
- Antibiotic-perturbed microbiota and the role of probiotics.Nature reviews. Gastroenterology & hepatology · 2025Review
- Cultivated genome references for protein database construction and high-resolution taxonomic annotation in metaproteomics.Microbiology spectrum · 2025Article
- Detection of colorectal-cancer-associated bacterial taxa in fecal samples using next-generation sequencing and 19 newly established qPCR assays.Molecular oncology · 2025Article
- Culture-based characterization of gut microbiota in inflammatory bowel disease.Frontiers in microbiology · 2025Article
- Integrative analysis of fungal communities in three types of Baijiu Daqu using third-generation sequencing and culturomics.Frontiers in microbiology · 2025Article
- The baseline fecal microbiome differs in patients with and without anastomotic leakage after colorectal cancer surgery.Heliyon · 2024Article
- Cultivating complexity: Advancements in establishing in vitro models for the mucus-adhering gut microbiota.Microbial biotechnology · 2024Review
- Dysbiosis promotes recurrence of adenomatous polyps in the distal colorectum.World journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2024Article
- Mapping the geographical distribution of the mucosa-associated gut microbiome in GI-symptomatic children with autism spectrum disorder.American journal of physiology. Gastrointestinal and liver physiology · 2024Article
- TwoInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2024Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFaecal samples are frequently used to characterise the gut microbiota in health and disease, yet there is considerable debate about how representative faecal bacterial profiles are of the overall gut community. A particular concern is whether bacterial populations associated with the gut mucosa are properly represented in faecal samples, since these communities are considered critical in the aetiology of gastrointestinal diseases. In this study we compared the profiles of the faecal and mucosal microbiota from ten healthy volunteers using bacterial culturing (culturomics) and next-generation sequencing targeting the 16S ribosomal nucleic acid (rRNA) gene. Paired fresh rectal biopsies and faecal samples were processed under stringent anaerobic conditions to maintain the viability of the bacteria. Four different sample types were analysed: faecal (F), faecal homogenised (FHg), biopsy tissue (B) and biopsy wash (BW) samples.
resultsThere were no significant statistical differences in either bacterial richness or diversity between biopsy washes (BW) and faecal (F) or faecal homogenised (FHg) samples. Principal coordinates analysis of a Bray-Curtis distance matrix generated from sequence variant tables did not show distinct clustering between these samples (PERMANOVA; p = 0.972) but showed strong clustering of samples from individual donors. However, the rectal biopsy tissue (B) samples had a significantly altered bacterial signature with greater abundance of Proteobacteria and Acidobacteria compared to faecal (F) and faecal homogenised (FHg) samples. A total of 528 bacteria encompassing 92 distinct bacterial species were isolated and cultured from a subset of six volunteer samples (biopsy washes and faeces). This included isolation of 22 novel bacterial species. There was significant similarity between the bacterial species grown in anaerobic culture and those identified by 16S rRNA gene sequencing (Spearman correlation; rho = 0.548, p = 0.001).
conclusionThis study showed that the bacterial profiles of paired faecal and rectal biopsy wash samples were very similar, validating the use of faecal samples as a convenient surrogate for rectal biopsy-associated microbiota. Anaerobic bacterial culture results showed similar taxonomic patterns to the amplicon sequence analysis disproving the dogma that culture-based methods do not reflect findings of molecular assessments of gut bacterial composition. Video abstract.
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.