CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 147Ruminant Nutrition and Digestive PhysiologyAnaerobic Digestion and Biogas ProductionGut microbiota and health

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 58 of the 60 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Study of methanogen communities associated with different rumen protozoal populations

Open access
Belanche, Alejandro, de la Fuente, Gabriel, Newbold, Charles J.·2014·FEMS Microbiology Ecology
DOI 10.1111/1574-6941.12423PMC PMC4286163
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Protozoa-associated methanogens (PAM) are considered one of the most active communities in the rumen methanogenesis. This experiment investigated whether methanogens are sequestrated within rumen protozoa, and structural differences between rumen free-living methanogens and PAM. Rumen protozoa were harvested from totally faunated sheep, and six protozoal fractions (plus free-living microorganisms) were generated by sequential filtration. Holotrich-monofaunated sheep were also used to investigate the holotrich-associated methanogens. Protozoal size determined the number of PAM as big protozoa had 1.7-3.3 times more methanogen DNA than smaller protozoa, but also more endosymbiotic bacteria (2.2- to 3.5-fold times). Thus, similar abundance of methanogens with respect to total bacteria were observed across all protozoal fractions and free-living microorganisms, suggesting that methanogens are not accumulated within rumen protozoa in a greater proportion to that observed in the rumen as a whole. All rumen methanogen communities had similar diversity (22.2 ± 3.4 TRFs). Free-living methanogens composed a conserved community (67% similarity within treatment) in the rumen with similar diversity but different structures than PAM (P < 0.05). On the contrary, PAM constituted a more variable community (48% similarity), which differed between holotrich and total protozoa (P < 0.001). Thus, PAM constitutes a community, which requires further investigation as part of methane mitigation strategies.

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 · 10.1111/1574-6941.12423

Cites

58 of 58 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Figure 1 Diagram depicting sheep inoculation and rumen sampling.
Figure 1 Diagram depicting sheep inoculation and rumen sampling.CC BY-NC · PubMed Central
Figure 2 Fluorescence microscopy images of the different protozoal fractions using propidium iodide dye and rhodamine filters. Protozoa fractions were obtained from holotrich-monofaunated (H60 and H20) and totally faunated sheep (F80, F60, F45, F35, F20, F5 and F < 5) using different nylon meshes (80, 60, 45, 35, 20 and 5 μm pore size).
Figure 2 Fluorescence microscopy images of the different protozoal fractions using propidium iodide dye and rhodamine filters. Protozoa fractions were obtained from holotrich-monofaunated (H60 and H20) and totally faunated sheep (F80, F60, F45, F35, F20, F5 and F < 5) using different nylon meshes (80, 60, 45, 35, 20 and 5 μm pore size).CC BY-NC · PubMed Central
Figure 3 (a) Ratio bacteria/protozoa, (b) methanogens/protozoa and (c) methanogens/bacteria in different rumen protozoal fractions obtained from holotrich-monofaunated (H60 and H20) and totally faunated sheep (F80, F60, F45, F35, F20, F5 and F < 5) using different nylon meshes (80, 60, 45, 35, 20 and 5 μm pore size). Data were log10-transformed to attain normality. Bars with different letters (a, b, c, d, e) of the same colour differ (P < 0.05).
Figure 3 (a) Ratio bacteria/protozoa, (b) methanogens/protozoa and (c) methanogens/bacteria in different rumen protozoal fractions obtained from holotrich-monofaunated (H60 and H20) and totally faunated sheep (F80, F60, F45, F35, F20, F5 and F < 5) using different nylon meshes (80, 60, 45, 35, 20 and 5 μm pore size). Data were log10-transformed to attain normality. Bars with different letters (a, b, c, d, e) of the same colour differ (P < 0.05).CC BY-NC · PubMed Central
Figure 4 (a) PCoA illustrating the differences in the endosymbiotic methanogens associated with different rumen protozoal fractions obtained from holotrich-monofaunated (H) and totally faunated sheep (F). Big circles indicate the 90% confidential interval. (b) Dendrogram depicting the effect of total protozoa fractionation on their endosymbiotic methanogen populations. Protozoa fractions (F80, F60, F45, F35, F20, F5 and F < 5) were generated by a sequential filtration of rumen fluids from different sheep (A, B, C and D) through nylon meshes with a pore size of 80, 60, 45, 35, 20 and 5 μm, respectively.
Figure 4 (a) PCoA illustrating the differences in the endosymbiotic methanogens associated with different rumen protozoal fractions obtained from holotrich-monofaunated (H) and totally faunated sheep (F). Big circles indicate the 90% confidential interval. (b) Dendrogram depicting the effect of total protozoa fractionation on their endosymbiotic methanogen populations. Protozoa fractions (F80, F60, F45, F35, F20, F5 and F < 5) were generated by a sequential filtration of rumen fluids from different sheep (A, B, C and D) through nylon meshes with a pore size of 80, 60, 45, 35, 20 and 5 μm, respectively.CC BY-NC · PubMed Central

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

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?

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 60 references

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. Belanche, 2012, Are methane emissions determined by the fermentation pattern or by the rumen microbiota?, 27
  2. Coleman, 1975, The interrelationship between rumen ciliate protozoa and bacteria, 602
  3. Dehority, 1993, Laboratory Manual for Classification and Morphology of Ruminal Ciliate Protozoa, 120
  4. Demeyer, 1975, Methanogenesis, an integrated part of carbohydrate fermentation and its control, 366
  5. Van Hoven, 1977, Carbohydrate fermentation by the rumen ciliate Dasytricha ruminantium, Protistologica, 13, 599

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 147

Related

Metadata

Authors
Belanche, A., de la Fuente, G., & Newbold, C. J.
Affiliations
  • Aberystwyth University (GB)
  • Institute of Biological, Environmental and Rural Sciences, Aberystwyth University, Aberystwyth, UK
Corresponding author
Newbold, Charles J.
ORCID
Venue
FEMS Microbiology Ecology
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Published
2014-12-01
Volume
90
Issue
3
Pages
663-677
ISSN
  • 0168-6496 (ISSN-L)
  • 1574-6941
DOI
10.1111/1574-6941.12423
PMC
PMC4286163
OpenAlex
W2018339579
Cited by
147
References
60
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 19 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 1
FWCI
17.27
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • FEMS Microbiology Ecology (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RECERCAT (Consorci de Serveis Universitaris de Catalunya) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • Repositori ObertUDL (University of Lleida) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • LA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
Funders
European Commission (FP7, REDNEX project)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Animal Science and Zoology › Ruminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
  • Physical Sciences › Energy › Renewable Energy, Sustainability and the Environment › Anaerobic Digestion and Biogas Production
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Gut microbiota and health
Keywords
rumen methanogenesis, rumen protozoa, endosymbiotic bacteria, methane mitigation, sheep
MeSH terms
Animals, Bacteria, Methane, Polymorphism, Restriction Fragment Length, Rumen, Symbiosis, Trichostomatida, Euryarchaeota, Sheep, Domestic

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