Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 209

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Comparative analyses of foregut and hindgut bacterial communities in hoatzins and cows

Open access
Godoy-Vitorino, Filipa, Goldfarb, Katherine C, Karaoz, Ulas, Leal, Sara, Garcia-Amado, Maria A, Hugenholtz, Philip, Tringe, Susannah G, Brodie, Eoin L, Dominguez-Bello, Maria Gloria·2012·The ISME Journal

Abstract

Foregut fermentation occurs in mammalian ruminants and in one bird, the South American folivorous hoatzin. This bird has an enlarged crop with a function analogous to the rumen, where foregut microbes degrade the otherwise indigestible plant matter, providing energy to the host from foregut fermentation, in addition to the fermentation that occurs in their hindguts (cecum/colon). As foregut fermentation represents an evolutionary convergence between hoatzins and ruminants, our aim was to compare the community structure of foregut and hindgut bacterial communities in the cow and hoatzin to evaluate the influences of host phylogeny and organ function in shaping the gut microbiome. The approach used was to hybridize amplified bacterial ribosomal RNA genes onto a high-density microarray (PhyloChip). The results show that the microbial communities cluster primarily by functional environment (foreguts cluster separately from hindguts) and then by host. Bacterial community diversity was higher in the cow than in the hoatzin. Overall, compared with hindguts, foreguts have higher proportions of Bacteroidetes and Spirochaetes, and lower proportions of Firmicutes and Proteobacteria. The main host differences in gut bacterial composition include a higher representation of Spirochaetes, Synergistetes and Verrucomicrobia in the cow. Despite the significant differences in host phylogeny, body size, physiology and diet, the function seems to shape the microbial communities involved in fermentation. Regardless of the independent origin of foregut fermentation in birds and mammals, organ function has led to convergence of the microbial community structure in phylogenetically distant hosts.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/ismej.2011.131

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 4 references

Cited by

See all 209

Metadata

Authors
Godoy-Vitorino, F., Goldfarb, K. C., Karaoz, U., Leal, S., Garcia-Amado, M. A., Hugenholtz, P., Tringe, S. G., Brodie, E. L., & Dominguez-Bello, M. G.
Venue
The ISME Journal
Published
2011-09-22
Volume
6
Issue
3
Pages
531-541
ISSN
  • 1751-7362 (ISSN-L)
  • 1751-7370
OpenAlex
W2036183948
Cited by
209
References
4
FWCI
3.17
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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: Comparative analyses of foregut and hindgut bacterial communities in hoatzins and cows. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1038/ismej.2011.131
The paper
Godoy-Vitorino, F., Goldfarb, K. C., Karaoz, U., Leal, S., Garcia-Amado, M. A., Hugenholtz, P., Tringe, S. G., Brodie, E. L., & Dominguez-Bello, M. G. (2012). Comparative analyses of foregut and hindgut bacterial communities in hoatzins and cows. The ISME Journal. https://doi.org/10.1038/ismej.2011.131

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.