↓ Skip to main content

Comparison of the fecal microbiota of dholes high-throughput Illumina sequencing of the V3–V4 region of the 16S rRNA gene

Overview of attention for article published in Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (71st percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
patent
1 patent

Citations

dimensions_citation
97 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
71 Mendeley
Title
Comparison of the fecal microbiota of dholes high-throughput Illumina sequencing of the V3–V4 region of the 16S rRNA gene
Published in
Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, January 2016
DOI 10.1007/s00253-015-7257-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Xiaoyang Wu, Honghai Zhang, Jun Chen, Shuai Shang, Qinguo Wei, Jiakuo Yan, Xiangyu Tu

Abstract

Intestinal microbes are part of a complex ecosystem. They have a mutual relationship with the host and play an essential role in maintaining the host's health. To optimize the feeding strategies and improve the health status of the dhole, which is an endangered species, we analyzed the structure of fecal microbes in four captive dholes using high-throughput Illumina sequencing targeting the V3-V4 region of the 16S rRNA gene. The diversity indexes and rarefaction curves indicated high microbial diversity in the intestines of the four dholes. The average number of operational taxonomical units (OTUs) in the four samples was 1196, but the number of OTUs common to all libraries was 126, suggesting only a few dominant species. Phylogenetic analysis identified 19 prokaryotic phyla from the 16S rRNA gene sequences, of which only 5 phyla were core microbiota: Bacteroidetes (21.63-38.97 %), Firmicutes (20.97-44.01 %), Proteobacteria (9.33-17.60 %), Fusobacteria (9.11-17.90 %), and Actinobacteria (1.22-2.87 %). These five phyla accounted for 97 % of the bacteria in all the dholes apart from one, in which 78 % of the bacteria were from these phyla. The results of our study provide an effective theoretical basis from which to reach an understanding of the biological mechanisms relevant to the protection of this endangered species.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 71 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
Unknown 70 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 14 20%
Student > Bachelor 14 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 15%
Student > Master 10 14%
Other 3 4%
Other 6 8%
Unknown 13 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 22 31%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 15 21%
Immunology and Microbiology 7 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 4%
Environmental Science 2 3%
Other 5 7%
Unknown 17 24%
Attention Score in Context

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 13 January 2021.
All research outputs
#7,307,222
of 24,119,703 outputs
Outputs from Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology
#2,480
of 8,034 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#112,518
of 401,759 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology
#36
of 130 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,119,703 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,034 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% 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 401,759 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 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 130 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.