Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37733779›Full record

ArticlePloS one2023

Assessing the validity of fecal sampling for characterizing variation in threespine stickleback's gut microbiota.

Andreas Härer, Diana J Rennison

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

2 authors.

Andreas HärerSchool of Biological Sciences, Department of Ecology, Behavior, & Evolution, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, California, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-2894-5041
Diana J RennisonSchool of Biological Sciences, Department of Ecology, Behavior, & Evolution, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, California, United States of America.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The gut microbiota is crucial for many aspects of their hosts' biology, and it has been characterized for many species across the animal kingdom. Yet, we still don't have a good understanding of whether non-lethal sampling can accurately capture the diversity of gut-associated bacterial communities, as estimated from lethal sampling of intestinal tissue. We further lack knowledge on whether non-lethal sampling methods are suitable for detecting gut microbiota shifts associated with changes in environmental factors (e.g., diet). We addressed these questions in threespine stickleback fish, a model system for evolutionary ecology, by comparing bacterial communities from intestinal tissue and feces. Despite some differences in community composition between the two sample types and considerable temporal variation among fecal samples, bacterial communities appear to largely overlap. Further, we detected consistent and significant changes of fecal bacterial communities associated with an experimental diet manipulation. This suggests that fecal sampling can represent an adequate non-lethal method to characterize the gut microbiota of threespine stickleback, but additional studies will be necessary before drawing general conclusions regarding the validity of fecal sampling for gut microbiota studies. To this end, we give recommendations to improve the characterization of the gut microbiota via fecal sampling. Fecal sampling allows studying temporal gut microbiota shifts associated with environmental change at the individual level, which increases opportunities for future experimental gut microbiota research.

Indexed as

Gastrointestinal MicrobiomeSmegmamorphaAnimalsBiological EvolutionEcologyFeces

Identifiers

PMID37733779
PMCPMC10513271

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.