The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Comparison of bacterial diversity along the human intestinal tract by direct cloning and sequencing of 16S rRNA genes
Open accessAbstract
Bacterial diversity of the mucosal biopsies from human jejunum, distal ileum, ascending colon and rectum were compared by analysis of PCR-amplified 16S rDNA clone libraries. A total of 347 clones from the mucosal biopsies were partially sequenced and assigned to six phylogenetic phyla of the domain Bacteria: Firmicutes, Bacteroidetes, Proteobacteria, Fusobacteria, Verrucomicrobia, and Actinobacteria. The jejunum sample had least microbial diversity compared to the other samples and a trend towards highest diversity in ascending colon was observed. The clone libraries of distal ileum, ascending colon and rectum were not significantly different from each other (P>0.0043), but they differed significantly from the jejunum library (P=0.001). The population of sequences retrieved from jejunal biopsies was dominated by sequences closely related to Streptococcus (67%), while the population of sequences derived from distal ileum, ascending colon and rectum were dominated by sequences affiliated with Bacteroidetes (27-49%), and Clostridium clusters XIVa (20-34%) and IV (7-13%). The results indicate that the microbial community in jejunum is different from those in distal ileum, ascending colon and rectum, and that the major phylogenetic groups are similar from distal ileum to rectum.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Zoetendal, E. G., von Wright, A., Vilpponen-Salmela, T., Ben-Amor, K., Akkermans, A. D. L., & de Vos, W. M. (2002) · Applied and Environmental Microbiology · doi:10.1128/aem.68.7.3401-3407.2002 · Cited by 868
Cited by
Gut microbiome and health: mechanistic insights
de Vos, W. M., Tilg, H., Van Hul, M., & Cani, P. D. (2022) · Gut · doi:10.1136/gutjnl-2021-326789 · Cited by 2,388
Microbial degradation of complex carbohydrates in the gut
Flint, H. J., Scott, K. P., Duncan, S. H., Louis, P., & Forano, E. (2012) · Gut Microbes · doi:10.4161/gmic.19897 · Cited by 2,331
The first 1000 cultured species of the human gastrointestinal microbiota
Rajilić-Stojanović, M., & de Vos, W. M. (2014) · FEMS Microbiology Reviews · doi:10.1111/1574-6976.12075 · Cited by 1,182
A complex human gut microbiome cultured in an anaerobic intestine-on-a-chip
Jalili-Firoozinezhad, S., Gazzaniga, F. S., Calamari, E. L., Camacho, D. M., Fadel, C. W., Bein, A., Swenor, B., Nestor, B., Cronce, M. J., Tovaglieri, A., et al. (2019) · Nature Biomedical Engineering · doi:10.1038/s41551-019-0397-0 · Cited by 855
The gut microbiome: connecting spatial organization to function
Tropini, C., Earle, K. A., Huang, K. C., & Sonnenburg, J. L. (2017) · Cell Host & Microbe · doi:10.1016/j.chom.2017.03.010 · Cited by 685
Metadata
- Authors
- Wang, M., Ahrné, S., Jeppsson, B., & Molin, G.
- Venue
- FEMS Microbiology Ecology
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2005-10
- Volume
- 54
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 219-231
- ISSN
- 0168-6496 (ISSN-L)
- 1574-6941
- OpenAlex
- W2153072657
- Cited by
- 372
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 4.72
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Comparison of bacterial diversity along the human intestinal tract by direct cloning and sequencing of 16S rRNA genes. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.femsec.2005.03.012
- The paper
- Wang, M., Ahrné, S., Jeppsson, B., & Molin, G. (2005). Comparison of bacterial diversity along the human intestinal tract by direct cloning and sequencing of 16S rRNA genes. FEMS Microbiology Ecology. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.femsec.2005.03.012
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
