ArticleJournal of the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science : JAALAS2025
Influence of Water Delivery Method on the Gut Microbiome in Laboratory Mice (Mus musculus).
Article in Journal of the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science : JAALAS, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Nuances related to the milieu of the gastrointestinal tract have led to investigations of environmental (or extrinsic) factors, like feed sources and fluid intake, and their influences on the gut microbiome in research animals. Water is typically provided to laboratory mice either by reusable water bottle (RWB), housing rack automatic water (RAW) delivery, or single-use disposable plastic pouch (DPP). In this study, the influence of differing water delivery methods on gut microbiome stability was evaluated in immunocompetent (n = 36 B6; 18 male [M]:18 female [F]) and immunocompromised (n = 36 NOG; 18 M:18 F) strains of mice. Mice were housed on a single IVC rack in sex-specific groups and provided with autoclaved caging and bedding, irradiated feed, and chlorinated, reverse-osmosis water provided by one of 3 delivery methods (8 cages per method). Access to the room was restricted to select personnel to conduct animal care and sample collection tasks. Fecal pellets (n = 2) were collected from each animal every other week, and water samples were collected weekly for analysis. Over the course of the study, bacteria were detected in 11% of the RWB samples (7 of 63) and 4% of the RAW samples (1 of 25). DPP samples were consistently free of bacterial contamination. Shotgun metagenomics and statistical analyses revealed overt shifts in gut microbiota in the majority of mice throughout the study (21 of 25 cages). Histologic examinations of organs from representative clinically normal study mice (n = 12) were unremarkable. With minimal exceptions, microbiome shifts were statistically significant across cage cohorts, despite attempts to control experimental variables. This study is the first to demonstrate that the water delivery method does not impart a significant influence on gut microbiota stability in research rodents and highlights the need to document water type, treatment, and delivery method as extrinsic factors in reporting animal studies.
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.