ArticleMicrobial ecology2026
Comparative Analysis of Nasal and Cloacal Bacterial Communities in Three Sea Turtle Species under Rescue Center Conditions.
Article in Microbial ecology, 2026. 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The mucosal microbiome plays a critical role in host health, yet the structural dynamics of the sea turtle nasal microbiome remain largely unexplored, and the ecological driving mechanisms of the cloacal microbiome under specific rescue contexts remain poorly understood. This study employed 16 S rRNA gene amplicon high-throughput sequencing to analyze bacterial community diversity in the nasal cavity and cloaca of green turtles (Chelonia mydas), hawksbill turtles (Eretmochelys imbricata), and olive ridley turtles (Lepidochelys olivacea) rehabilitated at the Naozhou Island Rescue Station. Results showed that the nasal microbiota exhibited high environmental plasticity. Holding conditions significantly explained > 50% of the variation in the green turtle nasal microbiota: unlike the low dominance and high evenness characteristics of the indoor group, specific outdoor environmental pressures drove the targeted enrichment of Sedimenticolaceae; whereas short-term indoor individuals displayed individual signatures associated with facial physical injury and stress. Beyond environmental effects, distinct species-specific patterns were also observed in the nasal cavity: the stable, high-abundance colonization of Deinococcota in hawksbill and olive ridley turtles constituted a distinct feature distinguishing them from green turtles. Regarding the cloacal microbiome, host species identity exerted the most significant effect, showing strong phylogenetic conservatism. The green turtle cloacal microbiota demonstrated significant environmental resistance, maintaining a core composition of Proteobacteria, Bacteroidota, and Campilobacterota. Hawksbill and olive ridley turtles reflected specific differentiation and functional convergence of the cloacal microbiota driven by dietary guilds: both exhibited a uniform high abundance of Cardiobacteriaceae, while Brumimicrobium served as a significant biomarker distinguishing hawksbills from the other two species. Within the constraints of sample size, this study establishes critical foundational data on the mucosal microbiomes of these three sea turtle species in a controlled rescue environment. Based on these profiles, we propose that the nasal microbiota serves as a sentinel for monitoring environmental stress, while the cloacal microbiota acts as a cornerstone for maintaining physiological homeostasis, thereby providing a critical scientific basis for health assessment, the optimization of rescue environments, and the development of species-specific conservation strategies.
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.