CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 616Infant Nutrition and HealthGut microbiota and healthProbiotics and Fermented Foods

The Microbial Ecology of the Large Bowel of Breastfed and Formula-fed Infants During the First Year of Life

Stark, P. L., Lee, A.·1982·Journal of Medical Microbiology
DOI 10.1099/00222615-15-2-189
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The succession of bacterial populations in the large bowel of seven breast-fed and seven formula-fed infants was examined during the first year of life. The composition of the intestinal microflora varied according to the infant's diet. During the first week of life breast-fed and formula-fed infants were colonised by enterobacteria and enterococci followed by bifidobacteria, Bacteroides spp., clostridia and anaerobic streptococci. From week 4 until solid foods were given, breast-fed babies had a simple flora consisting of bifidobacteria and relatively few enterobacteria and enterococci. Formula-fed babies during the corresponding period were more often colonised by other anaerobes in addition to bifidobacteria and had higher counts of facultatively anaerobic bacteria. The introduction of solid food to the breast-fed infants caused a major disturbance in the microbial ecology of the large bowel as counts of enterobacteria and enterococci rose sharply and colonisation by Bacteroides spp., clostridia and anaerobic streptococci occurred. This was not observed when formula-fed infants began to take solids; instead, counts of facultative anaerobes remained high while colonisation by anaerobes other than bifidobacteria continued. At 12 months, the anaerobic bacterial populations of the large bowel of breast-fed and formula-fed infants were beginning to resemble those of adults in number and composition and there was a corresponding decrease in the number of facultative anaerobes. These changes are discussed in relation to changes in susceptibility to gastro-intestinal infection.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1099/00222615-15-2-189

Cites

25 of 25 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Breast-fed and formula-fed infants differ in the composition of their intestinal microbiota.

    “Multiple studies have established differences in the composition of the intestinal microbiota based on whether infants are breast- or formula-fed5-7.”

    From Diet and the Intestinal Microbiome: Associations, Functions, and Implications for Health and Disease (2014) · cites this paper as [6]

  • Many studies show a higher proportion of Bifidobacteria in breast-fed infants than in formula-fed infants, and this difference is thought to be secondary to human milk oligosaccharide effects.

    “Some of the differences in the composition of the intestinal microbiota in breast-fed vs formula-fed infants are thought to be secondary to the effects of MOS on these bacteria—many studies have shown an increased proportion of Bifidobacteria in breast-fed infants 6, 7, 11 compared to formula-fed infants.”

    From Diet and the Intestinal Microbiome: Associations, Functions, and Implications for Health and Disease (2014) · cites this paper as [6]

  • Aerobic organisms appear more prevalent in feces of breast-fed infants, while anaerobic and facultatively anaerobic organisms are more common in feces of formula-fed infants.

    “aerobic organisms seem to be more prevalent in the feces of breast-fed infants, whereas anaerobic and facultatively anaerobic organisms, which preferentially use anerobic glycolysis, are more commonly found in the feces of formula-fed infants6.”

    From Diet and the Intestinal Microbiome: Associations, Functions, and Implications for Health and Disease (2014) · cites this paper as [6]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Stark, P. L., & Lee, A.
Affiliations
UNSW Sydney (AU)
Venue
Journal of Medical Microbiology
Publisher
Microbiology Society
Published
1982-05-01
Volume
15
Issue
2
Pages
189-203
ISSN
  • 0022-2615 (ISSN-L)
  • 1473-5644
DOI
10.1099/00222615-15-2-189
OpenAlex
W2131291912
Cited by
616
References
25
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 21 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 22 · 2015: 22 · 2014: 25 · 2013: 26 · 2012: 36
FWCI
6.91
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Medical Microbiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Infant Nutrition and Health
  • 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
Keywords
infant gut microbiota, breastfeeding, infant formula, large bowel, bacterial community succession, Bifidobacterium, Enterobacteriaceae, Enterococcus, Bacteroides, Clostridia, anaerobic streptococci, facultative anaerobes, solid food introduction, infant nutrition
MeSH terms
Actinomycetaceae, Aerobiosis, Aging, Anaerobiosis, Bacteroides, Bottle Feeding, Breast Feeding, Clostridium, Enterobacteriaceae, Feces, Humans, Infant, Infant, Newborn, Intestine, Large, Prospective Studies

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