ArticleInsects2024
Microbiota Analysis of Ejaculated Honey Bee Drone Semen and the Effect of Semen Collection Method on Bacterial Loads.
Article in Insects, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Artificial insemination in queen honey bees is the only tool that provides complete control over mating for research and breeding purposes, making it essential in genetic improvement and conservation programs in this species. The aims of this study were to characterize drone semen bacterial loads by culture-dependent and independent methods and to describe their variation depending on the method of semen collection, the colony and the apiary. In the first experiment, the bacterial loads of semen collected from the seminal vesicles or from ejaculates was studied using culture-dependent methods. The collection method had a significant influence on the overall bacterial count in semen. Out of the 42 semen samples analyzed, 26 (61.9%) tested positive for bacterial isolation. This encompassed the entirety of samples obtained from the seminal vesicles (21 of 21), whereas only 23.8% of those derived from ejaculates (5 out of 21) showed bacterial isolation. In the second experiment, next-generation sequencing techniques were used to describe the microbiome of ejaculated drone semen for the first time. The most abundant phyla were Proteobacteria, Firmicutes, Bacteroidota and Actinobacteriota, while the most abundant genera were
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.