ArticleAnimal microbiome2023
The microbiota knows: handling-stress and diet transform the microbial landscape in the gut content of rainbow trout in RAS.
Article in Animal microbiome, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Core, Resident, and Transient Members of the Trout Gut Microbiome: Dietary, Environmental, Stress and Pathogen/Antibiotic Modulation.Veterinary sciences · 2026Review
- Gut Microbiomes of Rainbow Trout and Atlantic Salmon: Nutritional Modulation, Mucosal Immunity, and Resistome Risk.Biology · 2026Review
- The role of human-pig interactions in modulating gut microbiota, stress, and performance.Porcine health management · 2025Article
- Comprehensive insight into gut microbiota and their interaction with fatty acid profiles in Channa striata during the spawning season.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- The Impact of Whole-Animal Fluid Preservation on the Observed Gut Microbiome of Vertebrates: Implications for the Use of Museum Specimens in Microbiome Research.Molecular ecology resources · 2025Article
- Age matters: exploring differential effects of antimicrobial treatment on gut microbiota of adult and juvenile brown trout (Salmo trutta).Animal microbiome · 2025Article
- Differences and correlation analysis of feeding habits and intestinal microbiome inFrontiers in microbiology · 2025Article
- Fecal microbiome analysis uncovers hidden stress effects of low stocking density on rainbow trout.Animal microbiome · 2024Article
- Zebrafish (Ecology and evolution · 2024Article
- Zebrafish (bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe aim of the present study was to characterize the effects of handling stress on the microbiota in the intestinal gut contents of rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) fed a plant-based diet from two different breeding lines (initial body weights: A: 124.69 g, B: 147.24 g). Diets were formulated in accordance with commercial trout diets differing in their respective protein sources: fishmeal (35% in fishmeal-based diet F, 7% in plant protein-based diet V) and plant-based proteins (47% in diet F, 73% in diet V). Experimental diets were provided for 59 days to all female trout in two separate recirculating aquaculture systems (RASs; mean temperature: A: 15.17 °C ± 0.44, B: 15.42 °C ± 0.38). Half of the fish in each RAS were chased with a fishing net twice per day to induce long-term stress (Group 1), while the other half were not exposed to stress (Group 0).
resultsNo differences in performance parameters were found between the treatment groups. By using 16S rRNA amplicon sequencing of the hypervariable region V3/V4, we examined the microbial community in the whole intestinal content of fish at the end of the trial. We discovered no significant differences in alpha diversity induced by diet or stress within either genetic trout line. However, the microbial composition was significantly driven by the interaction of stress and diet in trout line A. Otherwise, in trout line B, the main factor was stress. The communities of both breeding lines were predominantly colonized by bacteria from the phyla Fusobacteriota, Firmicutes, Proteobacteria, Actinobacteriota, and Bacteroidota. The most varying and abundant taxa were Firmicutes and Fusobacteriota, whereas at the genus level, Cetobacterium and Mycoplasma were key components in terms of adaptation. In trout line A, Cetobacterium abundance was affected by factor stress, and in trout line B, it was affected by the factor diet.
conclusionWe conclude that microbial gut composition, but neither microbial diversity nor fish performance, is highly influenced by stress handling, which also interacts with dietary protein sources. This influence varies between different genetic trout lines and depends on the fish's life history.
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.