Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 517

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 50 of the 50 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Census of the Bacterial Community of the Gypsy Moth Larval Midgut by Using Culturing and Culture-Independent Methods

Open access
Broderick, Nichole A., Raffa, Kenneth F., Goodman, Robert M., Handelsman, Jo·2004·Applied and Environmental Microbiology

Abstract

Little is known about bacteria associated with Lepidoptera, the large group of mostly phytophagous insects comprising the moths and butterflies. We inventoried the larval midgut bacteria of a polyphagous foliivore, the gypsy moth (Lymantria dispar L.), whose gut is highly alkaline, by using traditional culturing and culture-independent methods. We also examined the effects of diet on microbial composition. Analysis of individual third-instar larvae revealed a high degree of similarity of microbial composition among insects fed on the same diet. DNA sequence analysis indicated that most of the PCR-amplified 16S rRNA genes belong to the γ-Proteobacteria and low G+C gram-positive divisions and that the cultured members represented more than half of the phylotypes identified. Less frequently detected taxa included members of the α-Proteobacterium,Actinobacterium, and Cytophaga/Flexibacter/Bacteroides divisions. The 16S rRNA gene sequences from 7 of the 15 cultured organisms and 8 of the 9 sequences identified by PCR amplification diverged from previously reported bacterial sequences. The microbial composition of midguts differed substantially among larvae feeding on a sterilized artificial diet, aspen, larch, white oak, or willow. 16S rRNA analysis of cultured isolates indicated that an Enterococcus species and culture-independent analysis indicated that an Entbacter sp. were both present in all larvae, regardless of the feeding substrate; the sequences of these two phylotypes varied less than 1% among individual insects. These results provide the first comprehensive description of the microbial diversity of a lepidopteran midgut and demonstrate that the plant species in the diet influences the composition of the gut bacterial community.

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 · 10.1128/aem.70.1.293-300.2004

Cites

50 of 50 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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 50 references

Cited by

See all 517

Metadata

Authors
Broderick, N. A., Raffa, K. F., Goodman, R. M., & Handelsman, J.
Venue
Applied and Environmental Microbiology
Published
2004-01
Volume
70
Issue
1
Pages
293-300
ISSN
  • 0099-2240 (ISSN-L)
  • 1098-5336
OpenAlex
W2154326098
Cited by
517
References
50
FWCI
19.99
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Census of the Bacterial Community of the Gypsy Moth Larval Midgut by Using Culturing and Culture-Independent Methods. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1128/aem.70.1.293-300.2004
The paper
Broderick, N. A., Raffa, K. F., Goodman, R. M., & Handelsman, J. (2004). Census of the Bacterial Community of the Gypsy Moth Larval Midgut by Using Culturing and Culture-Independent Methods. Applied and Environmental Microbiology. https://doi.org/10.1128/aem.70.1.293-300.2004

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.