| Title |
A human stool-derived Bilophila wadsworthia strain caused systemic inflammation in specific-pathogen-free mice
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Gut Pathogens, October 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13099-017-0208-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Zhou Feng, Wenmin Long, Binhan Hao, Ding Ding, Xiaoqing Ma, Liping Zhao, Xiaoyan Pang |
| Abstract |
Bilophila wadsworthia is a major member of sulfidogenic bacteria in human gut, it was originally recovered from different clinical specimens of intra-abdominal infections and recently was reported potentially linked to different chronic metabolic disorders. However, there is still insufficient understanding on its detailed function and mechanism to date. A B. wadsworthia strain was isolated from fresh feces of a latent autoimmune diabetes in adults patient and we investigated its pathogenicity by oral administration to specific-pathogen-free mice. Tissue samples and serum were collected after sacrifice. Stool samples were collected at different time points to profile the gut microbiota. Bilophila wadsworthia infection resulted in the reduction of body weight and fat mass, apparent hepatosplenomegaly and elevated serum inflammatory factors, including serum amyloid A and interleukin-6, while without significant change of the overall gut microbiota structure. These results demonstrated that higher amount of B. wadsworthia caused systemic inflammatory response in SPF mice, which adds new evidence to the pathogenicity of this bacterium and implied its potential role to the chronic inflammation related metabolic diseases like diabetes. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 20% |
| Canada | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 3 | 60% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 60% |
| Scientists | 2 | 40% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 126 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 126 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 23 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 17 | 13% |
| Researcher | 14 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 14 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 10 | 8% |
| Other | 19 | 15% |
| Unknown | 29 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 34 | 27% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 16 | 13% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 8% |
| Neuroscience | 7 | 6% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 6 | 5% |
| Other | 19 | 15% |
| Unknown | 34 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 15 November 2023.
All research outputs
#8,447,506
of 25,834,578 outputs
Outputs from Gut Pathogens
#177
of 614 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#126,642
of 339,385 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Gut Pathogens
#2
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,834,578 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 66th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 614 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its peers.
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 339,385 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.