Cited by 205Aquaculture disease management and microbiotaMicrobial Community Ecology and PhysiologyGut microbiota and health

Changes in the intestinal bacterial community during the growth of white shrimp, Litopenaeus vannamei

Huang, Zhaobin, Li, Xiaoyi, Wang, Liping, Shao, Zongze·2016·Aquaculture Research

Abstract

In this study, we documented the changes in the intestinal bacterial community at four stages in Litopenaeus vannamei: 14 days postlarvae (L14) and 1-, 2- and 3-month old juveniles (J1, J2, J3), using 454 pyrosequencing techniques. The intestinal bacterial community was dominated by three bacterial phyla, Proteobacteria, Bacteroidetes and Actinobacteria at all stages. However, the relative abundance and bacterial lineages varied at the family level. The intestinal bacterial community of L14 and J1 was similar, with dominant members belonging to the Comamonadaceae of Betaproteobacteria. Conversely, bacterial members affiliated to Flavobacteriaceae of Bacteroidetes were dominant in J2 and Vibrionaceae of Gammaproteobacteria was dominant in J3. The abundance of Microbacteriaceae of Actinobacteria also fluctuated during the four stages. Bacterial members of Flavobacteriaceae and Rhodobacteraceae (Alphaproteobacteria) were present through all growth stages, and likely form the intestinal core microbiome of L. vannamei. However, they varied at the operational taxonomic unit (OTU) level through the growth stages. The intestinal bacterial community of pond-rearing shrimp included the three main bacterial phyla identified above, and an additional group, Mycoplasmataceae of Mollicutes. Our results demonstrate that the intestinal bacterial community of L. vannamei was highly dynamic during the growth stages. Bacterial members belonging to Commamonadaceae dominated in the earlier growth stage of shrimp, possibly influenced by feeding with Artemia nauplii, but there was a shift to Flavobacteriaceae in the mid and Vibrionaceae in the late growth stages.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/are.12628

Cites

35 of 35 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Huang, Z., Li, X., Wang, L., & Shao, Z.
Affiliations
  • Third Institute of Oceanography (CN)
  • Ningbo University (CN)
Corresponding author
Shao, Zongze
Venue
Aquaculture Research
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2014-10-28
Volume
47
Issue
6
Pages
1737-1746
ISSN
1355-557X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2116827175
Cited by
205
References
35
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 21 · 2022: 21 · 2021: 20 · 2020: 37 · 2019: 25 · 2018: 19 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 4
FWCI
2.74
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Aquaculture Research (publishedVersion)
Funders
Public Welfare Project of SOA, China (201005032)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Immunology › Aquaculture disease management and microbiota
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Microbial Community Ecology and Physiology
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Gut microbiota and health
Keywords
Litopenaeus vannamei, white shrimp, intestinal bacterial community, gut microbiota, postlarvae, juveniles, Proteobacteria, Bacteroidetes, actinobacteria, Flavobacteriaceae, Vibrionaceae, Microbacteriaceae, Mycoplasmataceae, Artemia nauplii, bacterial community dynamics

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