The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Temperature Gradient Gel Electrophoresis Analysis of 16S rRNA from Human Fecal Samples Reveals Stable and Host-Specific Communities of Active Bacteria
Open accessAbstract
The diversity of the predominant bacteria in the human gastrointestinal tract was studied by using 16S rRNA-based approaches. PCR amplicons of the V6 to V8 regions of fecal 16S rRNA and ribosomal DNA (rDNA) were analyzed by temperature gradient gel electrophoresis (TGGE). TGGE of fecal 16S rDNA amplicons from 16 individuals showed different profiles, with some bands in common. Fecal samples from two individuals were monitored over time and showed remarkably stable profiles over a period of at least 6 months. TGGE profiles derived from 16S rRNA and rDNA amplicons showed similar banding patterns. However, the intensities of bands with similar mobilities differed in some cases, indicating a different contribution to the total active fraction of the prominent fecal bacteria. Most 16S rRNA amplicons in the TGGE pattern of one subject were identified by cloning and sequence analysis. Forty-five of the 78 clones matched 15 bands, and 33 clones did not match any visible band in the TGGE pattern. Nested PCR of amplified 16S rDNA indicated preferential amplification of a sequence corresponding to 12 of the 33 nonmatching clones with similar mobilities in TGGE. The sequences matching 15 bands in the TGGE pattern showed 91.5 to 98.7% homology to sequences derived from different Clostridium clusters. Most of these were related to strains derived from the human intestine. The results indicate that the combination of cloning and TGGE analysis of 16S rDNA amplicons is a reliable approach to monitoring different microbial communities in feces.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
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.
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
Cited by
Items 101–107 of 107
Oral prebiotics and the influence of environmental conditions in vitro
Slomka, V., Herrero, E. R., Boon, N., Bernaerts, K., Trivedi, H. M., Daep, C., Quirynen, M., & Teughels, W. (2018) · Journal of Periodontology · doi:10.1002/jper.17-0437 · Cited by 54
Genetic modification of iron metabolism in mice affects the gut microbiota
Buhnik-Rosenblau, K., Moshe-Belizowski, S., Danin-Poleg, Y., & Meyron-Holtz, E. G. (2012) · BioMetals · doi:10.1007/s10534-012-9555-5 · Cited by 53
Gut microbiology – broad genetic diversity, yet specific metabolic niches
John Wallace, R. (2008) · animal · doi:10.1017/s1751731108001687 · Cited by 51
Bernbom, N., Nørrung, B., Saadbye, P., Mølbak, L., Vogensen, F. K., & Licht, T. R. (2006) · Journal of Microbiological Methods · doi:10.1016/j.mimet.2005.10.014 · Cited by 48
Molecular analysis of the intestinal microflora in IBD
Tannock, G. W. (2008) · Mucosal Immunology · doi:10.1038/mi.2008.54 · Cited by 33
Rasmussen, H. E., Martínez, I., Lee, J. Y., & Walter, J. (2009) · Journal of Applied Microbiology · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2672.2009.04288.x · Cited by 32
Imirzalioglu, C., Sethi, S., Schneider, C., Hain, T., Chakraborty, T., Mayser, P., & Domann, E. (2014) · BMC Research Notes · doi:10.1186/1756-0500-7-196 · Cited by 23
Metadata
- Authors
- Zoetendal, E. G., Akkermans, A. D. L., & De Vos, W. M.
- Venue
- Applied and Environmental Microbiology
- Publisher
- American Society for Microbiology
- Published
- 1998-10
- Volume
- 64
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 3854-3859
- ISSN
- 0099-2240 (ISSN-L)
- 1098-5336
- OpenAlex
- W2122007620
- Cited by
- 1,360
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 6.98
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
