| Title |
Quantitative PCR assays for mouse enteric flora reveal strain-dependent differences in composition that are influenced by the microenvironment
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Mammalian Genome, November 2006
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00335-006-0063-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
A. Deloris Alexander, Roger P. Orcutt, JaNell C. Henry, Joseph Baker, Anika C. Bissahoyo, David W. Threadgill |
| Abstract |
The mammalian gastrointestinal (GI) tract is inhabited by over a hundred species of symbiotic bacteria. Differences among individuals in the composition of the GI flora may contribute to variation in in vivo experimental analyses and disease susceptibility. To investigate potential interindividual differences in GI flora composition, we developed real-time quantitative PCR-based assays for the detection of the eight members of the Altered Schaedler Flora (ASF) as representative members of different bacterial niches within the mammalian GI tract. Quantitative and reproducible strain-specific variations in the numbers of the ASF members were observed across 23 different barrier-housed inbred mouse strains, suggesting that the ASF assays can be used as sentinels for changes in GI flora composition. A significant cage effect was also detected. Isogenic mice that cohabited at weaning, whether from the same or different litters, showed little variation in ASF profiles. Conversely, litters split among different cages at weaning showed divergence in ASF profiles after three weeks. Individual ASF profiles, once established, were highly stable over time in the absence of environmental perturbation. Furthermore, cohabitation of different inbred strains maintained most of the interstrain variation in the GI flora, supporting a role of host genetics in determining GI flora composition. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 103 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 2% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Belgium | 1 | <1% |
| Mexico | 1 | <1% |
| Japan | 1 | <1% |
| Denmark | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 95 | 92% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 28 | 27% |
| Researcher | 26 | 25% |
| Student > Master | 14 | 14% |
| Professor | 9 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 6% |
| Other | 11 | 11% |
| Unknown | 9 | 9% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 51 | 50% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 16 | 16% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 6 | 6% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 5% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 3 | 3% |
| Other | 9 | 9% |
| Unknown | 13 | 13% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 January 2016.
All research outputs
#7,521,897
of 22,955,959 outputs
Outputs from Mammalian Genome
#319
of 1,127 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#24,497
of 70,266 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Mammalian Genome
#1
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,955,959 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,127 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.6. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 70,266 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them