Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36290262›Full record

ArticleAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2022

Assessment of Adaptation Status of Reintroduced

Dini Hu, Chen Wang, Make Ente, Ke Zhang, Dong Zhang, Xuefeng Li, Kai Li, Hongjun Chu

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Dini HuSchool of Ecology and Nature Conservation, Beijing Forestry University, Qinghua East Road No.35, Beijing 100083, China.ORCID 0000-0001-7784-3469
Chen WangXinjiang Kalamaili Ungulate Nature Reserve Management Center, Changji 831100, China.
Make EnteXinjiang Research Centre for Breeding Przewalski's Horse, Urumqi 831700, China.
Ke ZhangSchool of Ecology and Nature Conservation, Beijing Forestry University, Qinghua East Road No.35, Beijing 100083, China.
Dong ZhangSchool of Ecology and Nature Conservation, Beijing Forestry University, Qinghua East Road No.35, Beijing 100083, China.
Xuefeng LiXinjiang Research Centre for Breeding Przewalski's Horse, Urumqi 831700, China.
Kai LiSchool of Ecology and Nature Conservation, Beijing Forestry University, Qinghua East Road No.35, Beijing 100083, China.
Hongjun ChuInstitute of Forest Ecology, Xinjiang Academy of Forestry, Urumqi 830063, China.
Beijing Forestry University · CNFanjingshan National Nature Reserve · CNXinjiang Academy of Forestry · CN

Funding

China Postdoctoral Science Foundation 2020TQ0047National Natural Science Foundation of China 31670538the Forestry Fund of LiBin 02210823
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Intestinal microbiota play an important role in the survival of the host. However, no study to date has elucidated the adjustment of intestinal microbiota of the host during rewilding. Thus, this study aims to describe the intestinal bacterial community of reintroduced Przewalski’s horse (RPH) after being released into their original habitat for approximately 20 years in comparison with that of captive Przewalski’s horse (CPH), sympatric domestic horse (DH) and Mongolian wild ass (MWA) by sequencing the 16S rRNA gene. The results showed that the prevalent bacterial communities were different among CPHs, RPHs, DHs and MWAs at the family level. NMDS and ANOSIM analysis showed that the pattern of bacterial community composition in captive equines was distinct from that in the wild groups. It is shown that some bacteria had significant differences among different taxa (p < 0.001), such as Firmicutes, Bacteroidetes, Armatimonadetes, Clostrida, Bacteroidia, Clostridiales, Bacteroidales, Rikenellaceae and Bacteroidales_UCG-001. These bacteria were associated with the transition from in captive to in the wild (CPH and RPH), which reflected the change of environmental conditions. Meanwhile, Proteobacteria, Clostridia, Bacilli, Negativicutes, Gammaproteobacteria, Clostridiales, Bacillales, Selenomonadales, Pseudomonadales and Planococcaceae were the changed groups among RPHs, MWAs and DHs, which are related to feeding habits and diseases. Our results clearly showed the differences between intestinal microbiota in reintroduced animals and wild animals and led us to understand the survival state of reintroduced animals in the wild.

Indexed as

environmental adaptationEquus przewalskiiintestinal microbiotareintroduced animalwild animal

Identifiers

PMID36290262
PMCPMC9598124
OpenAlexW4307117526

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.