ArticleScientific reports2024
Characterising the Tasmanian devil (Sarcophilus harrisii) pouch microbiome in lactating and non-lactating females.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Characterising the gut microbiome of six Australian marsupials reveals captivity constrains microbiome.Animal microbiome · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Wildlife harbour a diverse range of microorganisms that affect their health and development. Marsupials are born immunologically naïve and physiologically underdeveloped, with primary development occurring inside a pouch. Secretion of immunological compounds and antimicrobial peptides in the epithelial lining of the female's pouch, pouch young skin, and through the milk, are thought to boost the neonate's immune system and potentially alter the pouch skin microbiome. Here, using 16S rRNA amplicon sequencing, we characterised the Tasmanian devil pouch skin microbiome from 25 lactating and 30 non-lactating wild females to describe and compare across these reproductive stages. We found that the lactating pouch skin microbiome had significantly lower amplicon sequence variant richness and diversity than non-lactating pouches, however there was no overall dissimilarity in community structure between lactating and non-lactating pouches. The top five phyla were found to be consistent between both reproductive stages, with over 85% of the microbiome being comprised of Firmicutes, Proteobacteria, Fusobacteriota, Actinobacteriota, and Bacteroidota. The most abundant taxa remained consistent across all taxonomic ranks between lactating and non-lactating pouch types. This suggests that any potential immunological compounds or antimicrobial peptide secretions did not significantly influence the main community members. Of the more than 16,000 total identified amplicon sequence variants, 25 were recognised as differentially abundant between lactating and non-lactating pouches. It is proposed that the secretion of antimicrobial peptides in the pouch act to modulate these microbial communities. This study identifies candidate bacterial clades on which to test the activity of Tasmanian devil antimicrobial peptides and their role in pouch young protection, which in turn may lead to future therapeutic development for human diseases.
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.