Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40626776›Full record

ArticleMicrobiology spectrum2025

Toward standardized methods in canine vaginal microbiome research: evaluation of storage, host DNA depletion, and database selection.

Lotte Spanoghe, Guillaume Domain, Florin Posastiuc, Amanda Hettiarachchi, Adelaide Panattoni, Sebastiaan Theuns, Filip Van Immerseel, Geert Opsomer, Ann Van Soom, Penelope Banchi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Microbiology spectrum, 2025. 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. Article
  2. 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

10 authors.

Lotte SpanogheDepartment of Internal Medicine, Reproduction and Population Medicine, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ghent University, Merelbeke, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0001-7604-6783
Guillaume DomainDepartment of Internal Medicine, Reproduction and Population Medicine, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ghent University, Merelbeke, Belgium.
Florin PosastiucDepartment of Internal Medicine, Reproduction and Population Medicine, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ghent University, Merelbeke, Belgium.
Amanda HettiarachchiPathoSense BV, Lier, Belgium.
Adelaide PanattoniPathoSense BV, Lier, Belgium.ORCID 0009-0006-6053-4014
Sebastiaan TheunsPathoSense BV, Lier, Belgium.
Filip Van ImmerseelDepartment of Pathobiology, Pharmacology and Zoological Medicine, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ghent University, Merelbeke, Belgium.
Geert OpsomerDepartment of Internal Medicine, Reproduction and Population Medicine, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ghent University, Merelbeke, Belgium.
Ann Van SoomDepartment of Internal Medicine, Reproduction and Population Medicine, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ghent University, Merelbeke, Belgium.
Penelope BanchiDepartment of Internal Medicine, Reproduction and Population Medicine, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ghent University, Merelbeke, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0001-6061-4889

Funding

Bijzonder Onderzoeksfonds UGent BOF23/DOC/081Fonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek 1SC1325N
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Standardized methods for investigating the canine vaginal microbiome are not available yet. Data using next-generation sequencing (NGS) are still limited, and methodologies lack consistency. In theory, microbiome results can be significantly affected by factors like sampling technique, storage, DNA extraction methods, and reference databases, which can all introduce bias. To address these concerns, we compared two storage methods for the sample (no medium vs. medium), examined the effect of host DNA depletion, and tested two reference databases (Emu vs. SILVA) using samples from six bitches, totaling 26 samples. Host depletion showed no significant impact on bacterial composition, nor did the storage conditions. However, when comparing reference databases, we found significant differences in beta diversity, emphasizing the importance of database choice when comparing studies. The proposed protocol paves the way for future studies on the canine vaginal microbiome, setting the basis for more precise and comprehensive microbiome profiling in this field. IMPORTANCE: Understanding the vaginal microbiome in dogs could lead to new insights into reproductive health and fertility, but progress is limited by the lack of clear guidelines on how samples should be collected, stored, and analyzed. This study helps clarify which steps in the process truly matter and which have little impact, offering practical guidance for researchers entering this field. By highlighting where inconsistencies can influence outcomes and which methodological choices affect results, we take an important step toward more reliable and comparable research. These findings support future scientific studies and hold potential to improve veterinary care over time.

Indexed as

BacteriaMicrobiotaSpecimen HandlingVaginaAnimalsDNA, BacterialDogsFemaleHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingRNA, Ribosomal, 16SDNA, BacterialRNA, Ribosomal, 16Scanine reproductioncanine vaginal microbiomeDNA sequencingmicrobiomeveterinary microbiology

Identifiers

PMID40626776
PMCPMC12323338

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.