Cited by 34Gut microbiota and healthProbiotics and Fermented FoodsInfant Nutrition and Health

The bifidobacterial distribution in the microbiome of captive primates reflects parvorder and feed specialization of the host

Open access
Modrackova, Nikol, Stovicek, Adam, Burtscher, Johanna, Bolechova, Petra, Killer, Jiri, Domig, Konrad J., Neuzil-Bunesova, Vera·2021·Scientific Reports

Abstract

Bifidobacteria, which commonly inhabit the primate gut, are beneficial contributors to host wellbeing. Anatomical differences and natural habitat allow an arrangement of primates into two main parvorders; New World monkeys (NWM) and Old World monkeys (OWM). The number of newly described bifidobacterial species is clearly elevated in NWM. This corresponds to our finding that bifidobacteria were the dominant group of cultivated gut anaerobes in NWM, while their numbers halved in OWM and were often replaced by Clostridiaceae with sarcina morphology. We examined an extended MALDI-TOF MS database as a potential identification tool for rapid screening of bifidobacterial distribution in captive primates. Bifidobacterial isolates of NWM were assigned mainly to species of primate origin, while OWM possessed typically multi-host bifidobacteria. Moreover, bifidobacterial counts reflected the feed specialization of captive primates decreasing from frugivore-insectivores, gummivore-insectivores, frugivore-folivores to frugivore-omnivores. Amplicon sequencing analysis supported this trend with regards to the inverse ratio of Actinobacteria and Firmicutes. In addition, a significantly higher diversity of the bacterial population in OWM was found. The evolution specialization of primates seems to be responsible for Bifidobacterium abundance and species occurrence. Balanced microbiota of captive primates could be supported by optimized prebiotic and probiotic stimulation based on the primate host.

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/s41598-021-94824-y

Cites

120 of 120 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The phylogenetically related B. bifidum species (PBS) are predominantly inhabitants of the non-human primates' gut.

    “The phylogenetically related B. bifidum species (PBS), collectively forming the B. bifidum group, and Ninclude B. aerophilum, B. amazonense, B. biavatii, B. goeldii, B. hapali, B. jacchi, B. leontopitheci, B. miconis, B. ramosum, B. samirii, B. scardovii, and B. simiiventris , are predominantly inhabitants of the non-human primates' gut [25-28] .”

    From Genome-scale insights into the metabolic landscape and evolutionary development of Bifidobacterium bifidum (2026) · cites this paper as [27]

    The Results (Cultivation analysis and Amplicon sequencing analysis; page unavailable) identify B. ramosum, B. biavatii, and B. aerophilum in non-human primates, supporting the gut association for some named species. Our copy does not identify the listed species collectively as a phylogenetically related B. bifidum group or establish that the group predominantly inhabits non-human primate guts. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 122 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [79]Malukiewicz, J. et al. The effects of host taxon, hybridization, and environment on the gut microbiome of Callithrix marmosets. BioRxiv, 708255 (2019).

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Modrackova, N., Stovicek, A., Burtscher, J., Bolechova, P., Killer, J., Domig, K. J., & Neuzil-Bunesova, V.
Affiliations
BOKU University (AT)
Venue
Scientific Reports
Published
2021-07-27
Volume
11
Issue
1
Pages
15273-15273
ISSN
2045-2322 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3185334909
Cited by
32
References
122
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 5
FWCI
1.73
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Scientific Reports (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
European Regional Development Fund (02.1.01/0.0/0.0, CZ.02, CZ.02.1.01, CZ.02.1.01/0.0, CZ.02.1.01 / 0.0 / 0.0 / 16_019 / 0000845, CZ.02.1.01/0.0/0.0, /16_019)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Gut microbiota and health
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Probiotics and Fermented Foods
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Infant Nutrition and Health
Keywords
Bifidobacterium, captive primates, New World monkeys, Old World monkeys, dietary specialization, frugivory, folivory, insectivory, Clostridiaceae, MALDI-TOF identification, actinobacteria, Firmicutes, bacterial diversity, prebiotics, probiotics
MeSH terms
Animals, Bifidobacterium, Feces, Primates, RNA, Ribosomal, 16S, Spectrometry, Mass, Matrix-Assisted Laser Desorption-Ionization, Probiotics, Microbiota

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