Cited by 249Gut microbiota and healthMicrobial Community Ecology and PhysiologyAquaculture disease management and microbiota

Unique and shared responses of the gut microbiota to prolonged fasting: A comparative study across five classes of vertebrate hosts

Open access
Kohl, Kevin D., Amaya, James, Passement, Celeste A., Dearing, M. Denise, McCue, Marshall D.·2014·FEMS Microbiology Ecology

Abstract

Many animals face unpredictable food sources and periods of prolonged fasting, which likely present significant challenges to gut microorganisms. While several studies have demonstrated that fasting impacts the gut microbiota, experiments have not been carried out in a comparative context. We used 16S rRNA gene sequencing to document changes in colonic and cecal microbiomes of animals representing five classes of vertebrates at four time points through prolonged fasting: tilapia, toads, geckos, quail, and mice. We found differences in the starvation-induced changes in the microbiome across host species and across gut regions. Microbial phylogenetic diversity increased as a result of fasting in the colons of fish, toads, and mice, while quail exhibited a decrease in diversity; geckos exhibited no change. Microbial diversity in the cecum decreased in fish and exhibited no change in mice. Alterations in relative abundances of microbial taxa varied across hosts. Fish exhibited the most significant changes due to fasting, while geckos maintained a stable community over 28 days of fasting. We uncovered several shared responses of the microbiota across hosts. For example, all tetrapods exhibited decreases in the abundances of Coprobacillus and Ruminococcus in response to fasting. We also discuss host-mediated physiological mechanisms that may underlie these community changes.

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 · 10.1111/1574-6941.12442

Cites

81 of 81 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?

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kohl, K. D., Amaya, J., Passement, C. A., Dearing, M. D., & McCue, M. D.
Affiliations
  • University of Utah (US)
  • St. Mary's University, Texas (US)
Corresponding author
Kohl, Kevin D.
Venue
FEMS Microbiology Ecology
Published
2014-11-03
Volume
90
Issue
3
Pages
883-894
ISSN
0168-6496 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2117781659
Cited by
249
References
81
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 18 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 29 · 2022: 25 · 2021: 38 · 2020: 32 · 2019: 23 · 2018: 26 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 19 · 2015: 5
FWCI
5.60
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • FEMS Microbiology Ecology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Science Foundation (DEB 1342615, DEB 1210094)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Gut microbiota and health
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Microbial Community Ecology and Physiology
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Immunology › Aquaculture disease management and microbiota
Keywords
gut microbiota, prolonged fasting, starvation, host-microbe interactions, colonic microbiome, cecal microbiota, microbial diversity, Coprobacillus, Ruminococcus, tilapia, toads, geckos, quail, mice, fish
MeSH terms
Animals, Anura, Base Sequence, Cecum, Fasting, Lizards, Phylogeny, Quail, RNA, Ribosomal, 16S, Tilapia, Sequence Analysis, DNA, Mice, 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