ArticleBMC genomics2024
Comparing the gut microbiota of Sichuan golden monkeys across multiple captive and wild settings: roles of anthropogenic activities and host factors.
Article in BMC genomics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Grass supplementation to a pellet-based diet fails to enrich gut microbiomes with wild-like functions in captive-bred hares.Microbiology spectrum · 2026Article
- MHC class II genes influence the gut microbiota of wild golden snub-nosed monkeys.BMC microbiology · 2026Article
- Intersite differences in gut microbiome are associated with habitat quality in a limestone forest-dwelling langur.BMC microbiology · 2026Article
- Clinical and biological significance of the relationship between gut microbiota and liver disease.World journal of hepatology · 2025Review
- Multi-omic profiling reveals distinct gut microbial and metabolic landscapes in golden snub-nosed monkeys under contrasting conservation strategies.NPJ biofilms and microbiomes · 2025Article
- A Comparison of the Intestinal Fungal Community in Wild and Captive Himalayan Vultures (Polish journal of microbiology · 2025Article
- Comparative Analysis of Compound Probiotics, Seasonal Variation, and Age on Gut Microbial Composition and Function in Endangered Forest Musk Deer.Microorganisms · 2025Article
- Prevalence and diversity of Helicobacter species in captive wild carnivores, and their implications for conservation management of endangered species.BMC veterinary research · 2025Article
- A combined treatment regimen forInternational journal for parasitology. Parasites and wildlife · 2025Article
- Gut microbiota alterations in golden snub-nosed monkeys during food shortage and parturition-nursing periods.Frontiers in microbiology · 2025Article
- Comparative Analysis of Gut Microbiota Between Wild and Captive Guizhou Snub-Nosed Monkey (Ecology and evolution · 2024Article
- What Can the Gut Microbiota of Animals Teach Us about the Relationship between Nutrition and Burden of Lifestyle Diseases?Nutrients · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCaptivity and artificial food provision are common conservation strategies for the endangered golden snub-nosed monkey (Rhinopithecus roxellana). Anthropogenic activities have been reported to impact the fitness of R. roxellana by altering their gut microbiota, a crucial indicator of animal health. Nevertheless, the degree of divergence in gut microbiota between different anthropogenically-disturbed (AD) R. roxellana and their counterparts in the wild has yet to be elucidated. Here, we conducted a comparative analysis of the gut microbiota across nine populations of R. roxellana spanning China, which included seven captive populations, one wild population, and another wild population subject to artificial food provision.
resultsBoth captivity and food provision significantly altered the gut microbiota. AD populations exhibited common variations, such as increased Bacteroidetes and decreased Firmicutes (e.g., Ruminococcus), Actinobacteria (e.g., Parvibacter), Verrucomicrobia (e.g., Akkermansia), and Tenericutes. Additionally, a reduced Firmicutes/Bacteroidetes ratiosuggested diminished capacity for complex carbohydrate degradation in captive individuals. The results of microbial functional prediction suggested that AD populations displayed heightened microbial genes linked to vitamin and amino acid metabolism, alongside decreased genes associated antibiotics biosynthesis (e.g., penicillin, cephalosporin, macrolides, and clavulanic acid) and secondary metabolite degradation (e.g., naphthalene and atrazine). These microbial alterations implied potential disparities in the health status between AD and wild individuals. AD populations exhibited varying degrees of microbial changes compared to the wild group, implying that the extent of these variations might serve as a metric for assessing the health status of AD populations. Furthermore, utilizing the individual information of captive individuals, we identified associations between variations in the gut microbiota of R. roxellana and host age, as well as pedigree. Older individuals exhibited higher microbial diversity, while a closer genetic relatedness reflected a more similar gut microbiota.
conclusionsOur aim was to assess how anthropogenic activities and host factors influence the gut microbiota of R. roxellana. Anthropogenic activities led to consistent changes in gut microbial diversity and function, while host age and genetic relatedness contributed to interindividual variations in the gut microbiota. These findings may contribute to the establishment of health assessment standards and the optimization of breeding conditions for captive R. roxellana populations.
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.