Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38800749›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in microbiology2024

Evaluation of fecal sample collection methods for feline gut microbiome profiling: fecal loop vs. litter box.

Xiaolei Ma, Emily Brinker, Christopher R Lea, Diane Delmain, Erin D Chamorro, Douglas R Martin, Emily C Graff, Xu Wang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in microbiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
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.

Xiaolei MaSchool of Life Sciences and Technology, Tongji University, Shanghai, China.
Emily BrinkerDepartment of Comparative Pathobiology, Cummings School of Veterinary Medicine, Tufts University, North Grafton, MA, United States.
Christopher R LeaDepartment of Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, Auburn University, Auburn, AL, United States.
Diane DelmainDepartment of Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, Auburn University, Auburn, AL, United States.
Erin D ChamorroDepartment of Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, Auburn University, Auburn, AL, United States.
Douglas R MartinScott-Ritchey Research Center, College of Veterinary Medicine, Auburn University, Auburn, AL, United States.
Emily C GraffDepartment of Pathobiology, College of Veterinary Medicine, Auburn University, Auburn, AL, United States.
Xu Wang *Department of Pathobiology, College of Veterinary Medicine, Auburn University, Auburn, AL, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Microbial population structures within fecal samples are vital for disease screening, diagnosis, and gut microbiome research. The two primary methods for collecting feline fecal samples are: (1) using a fecal loop, which retrieves a rectal sample using a small, looped instrument, and (2) using the litter box, which collects stool directly from the litter. Each method has its own advantages and disadvantages and is suitable for different research objectives. Methods and results: Whole-genome shotgun metagenomic sequencing were performed on the gut microbiomes of fecal samples collected using these two methods from 10 adult cats housed in the same research facility. We evaluated the influence of collection methods on feline microbiome analysis, particularly their impact on DNA extraction, metagenomic sequencing yield, microbial composition, and diversity in subsequent gut microbiome analyses. Interestingly, fecal sample collection using a fecal loop resulted in a lower yield of microbial DNA compared to the litterbox method ( Discussion: These two sample collection methods do not affect microbial population structures within fecal samples and collecting fecal samples directly from the litterbox within 6 hours after defecation can be considered a reliable approach for microbiome research.

Indexed as

fecal microbiomegut microbiotamicrobial diversitystool sample collectionwhole-genome shotgun metagenomic sequencing

Identifiers

PMID38800749
PMCPMC11127567

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.