ArticleGut microbes reports2025
Evaluating long-term stool preservation methods for maximizing the recovery of viable human fecal microbiota.
Article in Gut microbes reports, 2025. 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.
- Shipped and shifted: modeling collection-induced bias in microbiome multi-omics using a tractable fermentation system.NPJ biofilms and microbiomes · 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The gut microbiome plays a fundamental role in human health, prompting efforts to catalog and preserve its diversity across human populations. While DNA sequencing dominates microbiome research, cultivation remains essential for mechanistic studies and therapeutic development. However, best practices for long-term stool preservation remain limited. Here, we compared the stability of eight cryopreservation treatments for maintaining viable stool microbiota over a 1-y storage period at -80 °C (freezer) or at -196 °C (liquid nitrogen) using samples from infants, children, and adults. Combining cultivation on six media with 16S rRNA sequencing, we show that ultralow-temperature cryopreservation has a minimal impact on microbiota diversity compared to fresh cultures. Standard glycerol preservation and simple snap-freezing performed comparably to more complex and costly protocols, with all cultured samples retaining donor-specific microbiota profiles after long-term cryopreservation. The lack of strong treatment-specific effects on microbiota composition suggests a shared microbial response to freeze‒thaw stress favoring taxa with broad environmental tolerance. Our findings offer practical, low-cost strategies for stool biobanking. Importance: The cultivation of bacterial taxa from complex communities, such as those in fecal samples, is essential for mechanistic studies and the development of microbiota-based therapeutics, including defined consortia and individual probiotic strains. Such cultivation efforts typically rely on previously stored samples; however, systematic knowledge regarding long-term preservation strategies that ensure the viability and regrowth of constituent bacterial taxa remains limited. In this study, we systematically evaluated 16 distinct cryopreservation conditions to assess their efficacy in maintaining bacterial viability. Our results show that conventional glycerol-based preservation and simple snap-freezing are comparable in performance to more elaborate and cost-intensive protocols. Moreover, we identified the duration of sample transport prior to freezing as a critical determinant of post-thaw bacterial recovery. These findings provide valuable data on the relative effectiveness of various preservation methods and support the use of low-cost, easily implementable strategies that are particularly suitable for application in resource-limited settings.
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.